The Pentecostal Commentary: Matthew: The Pentecostal Commentary, #1

By Billy Prewitt

• The distinctive Pentecostal pneumatology is sustained
• Key doctrines are identified and expounded
• Important cross references within Scripture are noted
• Historical connections in Church history are mentioned
• Erroneous teachings are scrutinized
• Comments are based on the King James Version
• The KJV text is printed in the body of the commentary

With a modern style of readability, this commentary series is appropriate for anyone seeking to grow and understand the truths of Scripture and is especially helpful to pastors as well as college and seminary students.

Author's Foreward
As a Pentecostal student attending a Pentecostal Bible college, I went to the college bookstore to purchase my textbooks without knowing that the commentaries on my book list were written by non-Pentecostals. Even though my classes required commentaries from various publishers, none of the publishers were Pentecostal. I often wondered why a Pentecostal Bible school would use non-Pentecostal commentaries for class. What I did not know at the time was that there really was no such thing as a Pentecostal commentary written for and by Pentecostals. Since then, there have been a few Pentecostals who have written on individual books, but there are significant portions of even the New Testament that have had little or no Pentecostal voice. As a result, serious Pentecostal students have no other choice but to learn at the feet of non-Pentecostals.

I am not opposed to non-Pentecostal commentaries. Indeed, I have gained considerable insights from reading such, but there are two points of theology that I must consciously filter out every time I read them. The most important concern to a Pentecostal is that the pneumatology (the study of the Holy Spirit) presented by non-Pentecostals is very different than that of a Pentecostal. The second point is the emphasis on Calvinistic doctrines especially eternal security with which most Pentecostals do not agree. In addition, there are other theological differences and substantially different hermeneutical principals that can dramatically alter the interpretation of texts in non-Pentecostal ways.

In my studies, I have always desired to have a commentary that was thoroughly Pentecostal, but I never imagined that I would write one. From one Pentecostal to another, I hope you will find this series to be a breath of fresh Spirit anointed air.

Series Preface
While it is hoped that Bible students from other theological traditions will study and benefit from its contents, it is first and foremost Pentecostal. As such, this commentary does not include surveys of other viewpoints unless such inclusion is necessary for clarity of argument. In addition, with all due respect to our Charismatic brethren, it may be said that this series is not meant to be inclusive of Charismatic interpretations related to pneumatology.

The Pentecostal Commentary series intentionally excludes views of Scripture that do not hold to its inspiration, inerrancy, and infallibility, and also excludes modern liberal arguments of authorship, date, purpose, and so on. Traditional viewpoints on these subjects will be discussed without confusing the issue. In addition, 19th century criticism methods and concerns over source documents will not often be discussed. In other words, this series assumes that the Biblical text is as God wants it to be and that it was written by the person and at the time traditionally ascribed.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Billy Prewitt
• Release date: Sep 4, 2021
• ISBN: 9781005547981

Billy Prewitt

Billy M. Prewitt holds a PhD in Biblical Studies, a Master of Education in Educational Leadership, a Master of Arts in Theology, and a Bachelor of Arts in Sacred Music. His most recent accomplishments include authoring three Pentecostal Commentaries: Matthew, Galatians, and Acts 1-12. Additionally, along with his professional teaching experience in both the private and public sectors, he has served in the Church as a youth pastor, associate pastor, and currently serves as the pastor of Family Fellowship Church in Lake City, Florida.

Book preview

The

Pentecostal

Commentary

A Trinitarian Exposition of the New Testament

Volume 1

Matthew

Billy Prewitt

The Pentecostal Commentary

A Trinitarian Exposition of the New Testament

Matthew: Volume 1

© 2021 by Billy and Rebekah Prewitt

All rights reserved. The use of short quotations or occasional page copying for personal or group study is permitted and encouraged. Other permissions will likely be granted upon request.

Author’s

Foreward

As a Pentecostal student attending a Pentecostal Bible college, I went to the college bookstore to purchase my textbooks without knowing that the commentaries on my book list were written by non-Pentecostals. Even though my classes required commentaries from various publishers, none of the publishers were Pentecostal. I often wondered why a Pentecostal Bible school would use non-Pentecostal commentaries for class. What I did not know at the time was that there really was no such thing as a Pentecostal commentary written for and by Pentecostals. As a result, serious Pentecostal students had no other choice but to learn at the feet of non-Pentecostals.

I am not opposed to non-Pentecostal commentaries. Indeed, I have gained considerable insights from reading such, but there are two points of theology that I must consciously filter out every time I read them. The most important concern to a Pentecostal is that the pneumatology (the study of the Holy Spirit) presented by non-Pentecostals is very different than that of a Pentecostal. The second point is the emphasis on Calvinistic doctrines especially eternal security with which most Pentecostals do not agree. In addition, there are other theological differences and substantially different hermeneutical principals that can dramatically alter the interpretation of texts in non-Pentecostal ways.

In my studies, I have always desired to have a commentary that was thoroughly Pentecostal, but I never imagined that I would write one. From one Pentecostal to another, I hope you will find this series to be a breath of fresh Spirit anointed air.

In Christ,

Billy Prewitt

Series Preface

The Pentecostal Commentary series is designed with the serious Trinitarian Pentecostal student in mind. While it is hoped that Bible students from other theological traditions will study and benefit from its contents, it is first and foremost Pentecostal. As such, this commentary does not include surveys of other viewpoints unless such inclusion is necessary for clarity of argument. In addition, with all due respect to our Charismatic brethren, it may be said that this series is not meant to be inclusive of Charismatic interpretations related to pneumatology.

The Pentecostal Commentary series intentionally excludes views of Scripture that do not hold to its inspiration, inerrancy, and infallibility, and also excludes modern liberal arguments of authorship, date, purpose, and so on. Traditional viewpoints on these subjects will be discussed without confusing the issue. In addition, 19th century criticism methods and concerns over source documents will not often be discussed. In other words, this series assumes that the Biblical text is as God wants it to be and that it was written by the person and at the time traditionally ascribed.

The Pentecostal Commentary includes the entire text of the King James Version and does not seek to alter its meaning in any way. References to Greek or Hebrew are for clarification rather than re-interpretation. Likewise, disputed texts in the King James Version that have been excluded from modern translations will be included in this commentary and understood as inspired Scripture.

Contents

Introduction

Matthew 1

Genealogy (1:1-17)

The Birth of Jesus (1:18-25)

Matthew 2

The Wise Men (2:1-12)

Flight Into Egypt (2:13-15)

Herod’s Reaction and Death (2:16-18)

Out of Egypt (2:19-23)

Matthew 3

John the Baptist (3:1-12)

The Baptism of Jesus (3:13-17)

Matthew 4

Temptations of Christ (4:1-11)

The Ministry of Jesus Begins (4:12-17)

Calling the First Disciples (4:18-22)

The Ministry of Jesus (4:23-25)

Matthew 5

The Sermon on the Mount (5:1-2)

The Beatitudes (5:3-12)

Salt and Light (5:13-16)

Fulfilling the Law (5:17-20)

Thou Shalt Not Kill (5:21-26)

Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery (5:27-32)

Swear Not (5:33-37)

Resist Not (5:38-42)

Love Your Enemies (5:43-47)

Be Perfect (5:48)

Matthew 6

Alms (6:1-4)

Prayer (6:5-15)

Fasting (6:16-18)

Treasure and the Eye (6:19-24)

Take No Thought (6:25-34)

Matthew 7

Judging (7:1-6)

Asking and Doing (7:7-12)

Strait and Wide Gates (7:13-14)

False Prophets (7:15-23)

Wise and Foolish Builders (7:24-27)

The People Were Astonished (7:28-29)

Matthew 8

A Leper Cleansed (8:1-4)

A Centurion’s Servant Healed (8:5-13)

Jesus at Peter’s House (8:14-17)

A Scribe and a Disciple (8:18-22)

Jesus Calms a Storm (8:23-27)

Devils Cast Out (8:28-34)

Matthew 9

Jesus Heals and Forgives (9:1-8)

The Calling of Matthew (9:9-13)

Fasting (9:14-17)

A Dead Girl and a Bleeding Woman (9:18-26)

Two Blind Men Healed (9:27-31)

A Dumb Man With a Devil (9:32-34)

The Ministry of Jesus (9:35-38)

Matthew 10

The Twelve Apostles (10:1-4)

The Twelve Sent to Preach (10:5-10)

Instructions for Lodging (10:11-15)

Persecution (10:16-23)

Fear Them Not (10:24-33)

Division (10:34-39)

He That Receiveth You (10:40-42)

Matthew 11

John’s Disciples (11:1-6)

Jesus Talks About John (11:7-19)

Jesus Upbraids the Cities (11:20-24)

Jesus Talks to the Father (11:25-27)

Come Unto Me (11:28-30)

Matthew 12

Lord of the Sabbath (12:1-8)

A Man With a Withered Hand (12:9-14)

Jesus Fulfills Isaiah (12:15-21)

A Blind and Dumb Devil (12:22-29)

Blasphemy Against the Holy Ghost (12:30-37)

The Pharisees Ask for a Sign (12:38-42)

Unclean Spirits (12:43-45)

Jesus’ Mother and Brethren (12:46-50)

Matthew 13

The Sower (13:1-9)

Jesus Teaches His Disciples (13:10-17)

The Parable of the Sower Explained (13:18-23)

The Wheat and the Tares (13:24-30)

Mustard Seed and Leaven (13:31-33)

Parables Fulfill Scripture (13:34-35)

The Parable of the Tares Explained (13:36-43)

A Hidden Treasure, a Pearl of Great Price (13:44-46)

A Net (13:47-50)

Jesus Closes the Discourse (13:51-52)

Jesus Visits His Own Country (13:53-58)

Matthew 14

Herod and John the Baptist (14:1-12)

Feeding the Five Thousand (14:13-21)

Jesus Walks on Water (14:22-33)

Gennesaret (14:34-36)

Matthew 15

Washing Hands to Eat (15:1-9)

Defilement (15:10-20)

A Woman of Canaan (15:21-28)

A Display of Miraculous Power (15:29-31)

Feeding the Four Thousand (15:32-39)

Matthew 16

The Pharisees and Sadducees Ask for a Sign (16:1-4)

Beware of the Leaven (16:5-12)

Thou Art the Christ (16:13-20)

Jesus Foretells His Suffering (16:21-23)

True Discipleship (16:24-28)

Matthew 17

The Transfiguration (17:1-9)

John the Baptist (17:10-13)

A Lunatick Son (17:14-21)

Jesus Again Predicts His Death (17:22-23)

Tribute Money (17:24-27)

Matthew 18

Who Is the Greatest (18:1-6)

Offenses (18:7-11)

Lost Sheep (18:12-14)

A Trespassing Brother (18:15-17)

Binding, Loosing, and Agreeing (18:18-20)

Forgiveness (18:21-22)

The Unmerciful Servant (18:23-35)

Matthew 19

From Galilee to Judaea (19:1-2)

Divorce (19:3-9)

The Disciples’ Response (19:10-12)

Little Children (19:13-15)

A Rich Young Man (19:16-22)

The Eye of a Needle (19:23-26)

We Have Forsaken All (19:27-30)

Matthew 20

Labourers in the Vinyard (20:1-16)

Jesus Goes Toward Jerusalem (20:17-19)

Zebedee’s Children (20:20-23)

Servanthood (20:24-28)

Two Blind Men (20:29-34)

Matthew 21

The Triumphal Entry (21:1-11)

Jesus in the Temple (21:12-17)

Jesus and the Fig Tree (21:18-22)

Jesus’ Authority Challenged (21:23-27)

The Parable of the Two Sons (21:28-32)

The Parable of the Vineyard (21:33-46)

Matthew 22

The Parable of the Marriage (22:1-14)

Paying Tribute to Caesar (22:15-22)

The Sadducees and the Resurrection (22:23-33)

The Great Commandment (22:34-40)

What Think Ye of Christ? (22:41-46)

Matthew 23

Moses’ Seat (23:1-12)

Woe Unto You (23:13-33)

I Send Unto You Prophets (23:34-36)

O Jerusalem, Jerusalem (23:37-39)

Matthew 24

The Destruction of the Temple (24:1-2)

When Shall These Things Be? (24:3-14)

The Abomination of Desolation (24:15-22)

False Christs and the Appearing (24:23-31)

The Parable of the Fig Tree (24:32-35)

One Shall Be Taken (24:36-41)

Watch (24:42-44)

The Faithful and Evil Servants (24:45-51)

Matthew 25

The Wise and Foolish Virgins (25:1-13)

The Parable of the Talents (25:14-30)

The Sheep and the Goats (25:31-46)

Matthew 26

Jesus Again Predicts His Death (26:1-2)

The Jews Plot to Kill Jesus (26:3-5)

A Woman With an Alabaster Box (26:6-13)

Judas and the Chief Priests (26:14-16)

The Passover Meal (26:17-30)

Jesus Predicts Peter’s Denials (26:31-35)

Gethsemane (26:36-46)

Jesus’ Arrest (26:47-56)

Trial Before Caiaphas (26:57-68)

Peter Denies Christ (26:69-75)

Matthew 27

Jesus Sent to Pilate (27:1-2)

The Death of Judas (27:3-10)

Jesus Questioned by Pilate (27:11-14)

Barabbas Released and Jesus Condemned (27:15-26)

The Romans Soldiers Mock Jesus (27:27-31)

The Crucifixion (27:32-37)

Jesus Taunted (27:38-44)

The Death of Jesus (27:45-50)

Reactions to Christ’s Death (27:51-54)

The Women at the Crucifixion (27:55-56)

The Tomb of Jesus (27:57-61)

The Roman Guard (27:62-66)

Matthew 28

The Resurrection (28:1-7)

Jesus Appears to the Women (28:8-10)

The Watch Reports to the Priests (28:11-15)

The Great Commission (28:16-20)

Notes

About the Author

Introduction

Author

The author of the book of Matthew was the disciple of Jesus called by that name (Matthew 9:9, 10:3, Mark 3:18, Luke 6:15, Acts 1:13). He is often referred to as Levi (compare Matthew 9:9 and Mark 2:14). His profession before meeting Jesus was that of a publican or tax collector. His occupation gives us a bit of insight into his life. The word publican to the first century Jew was synonymous with sinner. The publicans were Jewish men who made their living collecting taxes for the Roman government. In the minds of the Jews, who but a sinner would do such a job?

Although Matthew is never cited as abusing his power, publicans were well known for such practices (Luke 19:1-10). Through this means, often the publicans were quite affluent putting them in a strange class of despised wealthy outcasts. Nevertheless, Jesus chose this unlikely candidate not only to be a disciple but also to be the author of the book that bears his name.

Audience

Internal evidence in the text of Matthew makes it easy to see that it was written primarily to the Jews. As an example, Matthew often employed the Jewish practice of substituting the name of God with either heaven or some other title. Thus in Matthew we read about the kingdom of heaven far more than the kingdom of God. Another example is that from the first verse of the Gospel, he included both Abraham and David and repeatedly demonstrated that Jesus was the fulfillment to the Old Testament Scriptures.

The fact that the originally intended audience was Jewish in no way indicates that Matthew’s Gospel is not also to be enjoyed by Gentiles in the Church. Those who dismiss the contents of books of the Bible based on intended audience are in error on that point. Even though it must be rightly divided, the whole Bible is for everyone!

Date

There can be no certainty regarding the exact date that Matthew was written, however, conservative scholars generally come to a date in the late 50s or early 60s. Both Augustine and Clement said that Matthew was the first gospel to be written. Modern scholarship says Mark was first, but this is an effort to make Matthew dependent on Mark. This line of argument originated in the age of source criticism and in no way proves that Matthew needed Mark in order to write his Gospel.

The scholars ask whether it is more likely that Matthew expanded Mark or that Mark condensed Matthew. In reality, Matthew’s accounts of parallel events are often abbreviated compared to Mark’s. If Matthew expanded Mark, as many scholars often claim, then why did he abbreviate many of the stories? It is clear that Luke was familiar with other sources (Luke 1:1-4), but neither Matthew nor Mark indicate such knowledge. Could it be entirely the wrong question to ask which Gospel is dependent on the other? It makes the assumption of dependence between the documents due to the similarities and fails to take into account the movement of the Spirit of God in the formula.

For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost (2 Peter 1:21).

It may be better to ask whether or not they were dependent at all rather than assume that they were. If Matthew and Mark were not dependent on each other, then the commonalities should be attributed to the Holy Ghost rather than any supposed or imagined source documents.

Matthew was an eyewitness to the events of his Gospel and Mark was a traveling companion of both Peter and Paul. Many believe that the whole of the book of Mark was thoroughly influenced by Peter who was another eyewitness. Why would eyewitness accounts inspired by the Holy Ghost be dependent one on the other?

Based on ancient testimony, Matthew was written before Mark. While ancient testimony is far from infallible, modern scholarship must overcome that testimony to say otherwise, it is possible that Matthew may have been the first of the four Gospels that was written. If that is the case, then the New Testament has them in the order of their dates.

Occasion and Purpose

Assuming a reasonably early date for the writing of Matthew, then 25-30 years had passed since the ascension of Christ. Many of the eyewitnesses were still alive to tell the story (1 Corinthians 15:6), however, that number continued to decrease. Probably apart from human invention, it became apparent that necessity required a written record of the life and teachings of Jesus Christ. By this time, mainstream Judaism had rejected Jesus as Messiah, however, some Jews were still willing to hear the message in spite of the fact that many Gentiles had been added to the Church.

The Temple still stood in Jerusalem; however, tensions between the Jews and Rome were continuing to escalate. Matthew’s Gospel provided a timely reminder to the Jewish Christians that their beloved Temple would soon fall. They were not to fear these things, but look to the Savior who would soon come again.

Genre and Language

The Gospel of Matthew, like the other Gospels, does not easily fit into any clearly defined literary genre. As such, these writings are in a class by themselves. They are not simply historical narratives even though much history is included. They are not primarily what would be classified as didactic, however, much didactic material is included. The presentation of Jesus Christ as it is given in the Gospels required a new and utterly unique genre which we have come to know as a Gospel. The word Gospel means good news. The word Gospel, however, has come to have a broader meaning than simply the four books which share this designation.

There has been significant ancient testimony that Matthew originally wrote his Gospel in Hebrew (or possibly Syriac/Aramaic). If that is so, we do not possess a copy of the Hebrew that Matthew wrote. Both Albert Barnes¹ and Matthew Henry² seem to think that sufficient proof has been presented to the contrary. The evidence is compelling to the point that McClintock and Strong assert, We may therefore not unwarrantably find here additional evidence that in the existing Greek text we have the work, not of a mere translator, but of an independent and authoritative writer.¹ Even if Matthew did make a Hebrew version, we only have the Greek. This does not in any way discredit the text of Matthew as authoritative. It was the Greek that was joyfully received as authoritative by the early church and the Greek that our English Bible is based upon.

Synoptic Gospels

Matthew, Mark, and Luke are considered the Synoptic Gospels leaving John to stand alone. This is because these three Gospels present the life of Jesus with such similarity. In the words of James Hastings, The first three Gospels give the same general survey, the same ‘synopsis,’ and are therefore called the ‘Synoptic Gospels.’⁴ Even though each Gospel is distinct, these three share variously even the very wording of particular events and sayings. John’s Gospel stands in contrast.

With the mention of similarities, it becomes evident that there are also differences. Together, this has led to what is known as the Synoptic Problem. To put a vast amount of research into a sentence, the Synoptic Problem is an attempt by scholars to reconcile both the amazing similarities and the differences between these three Gospels. This has ultimately been approached by assuming a shared oral tradition and dependence of the writers on each other in one way or another. It has been observed, however, that each solution has led to more difficulties in solving the problem.

The one solution that seems to have been entirely overlooked in the research is to recognize that Matthew, Mark, and Luke have ultimately the same author. While we affirm the human element in Biblical writing, we must understand the writing of Scripture to be the work of none other than the Holy Spirit. Men did not operate independently from Him and create these miraculously interwoven texts. It just simply could not have happened.

It has been briefly mentioned above that dependence upon each other is an unnecessary assumption. People who believe in the power of the Holy Spirit realize that this is true. Even the Bible validates that God can speak the same message to two people who are not even aware of each other. To prove this point, on the day that Elijah was translated, the sons of the prophets in Bethel and in Jericho asked Elisha the exact same prophetic question, Knowest thou that the LORD will take away thy master from thy head to day? (2 Kings 2:3, 5). Were these two groups of men dependent on one another? This also happened in the New Testament. When Paul was on the way to Jerusalem, the Holy Ghost witnesseth in every city, saying that bonds and afflictions abide me (Acts 20:23). Everywhere he went, he heard the same message. Did these prophetic witnesses need to be dependent on each other? Could it be possible that the Synoptic Problem will only be solved by eliminating the solutions and looking to the true source of the documents in question? The Gospels are exactly the way He intended them to be.

Before moving on, it is important to understand that there is a grievous theological error in looking for an oral tradition solution to the Synoptic Problem. This theory says that each of the Gospel writers wrote down the oral tradition as it was received. Obviously, there was oral teaching in the Church between the Ascension and the writing of the Gospels. To be sure, the stories of Jesus were passed down and circulated. The theory that Matthew, Mark, and Luke simply wrote these down in a formal document does two very serious injuries to the Scripture. First, it puts the authority in the spoken tradition rather than in the written. We must then ask whether the Gospel of Matthew is inspired writing or is it a transcript of inspired speech? To be sure, spoken words can be inspired and authoritative, but this theory makes the Gospels dependent not only on source text but also on source authority. If the inspiration lies in the oral tradition, then technically the Gospel documents are not inspired. They are only transcriptions of inspired speeches. This may seem like a thin line, but if we are to have full confidence in our Bible, we must understand that the written text is inspired in and of itself. Jesus repeatedly said, It is written… He constantly affirmed the written Word and constantly contended with oral traditions. The oral tradition theory takes away the authority of the Synoptic Gospels.

The second error is that it eliminates the Holy Spirit in the writing process. If Matthew, Mark, and Luke were simply writing down an oral tradition, then the authority was in the tradition, and the writing was simply mechanical. This is certainly not the picture that the Apostle Peter gives us as to how the Scriptures came to be (see 2 Peter 1:20-21). To properly understand Scripture, we must understand that it is primarily a work of the Holy Spirit. Much like speaking in tongues, the human is only the instrument by which the Holy Spirit speaks. The words do not originate in the mind of the human, nor do they depend on human understanding. To eliminate the Holy Spirit’s oversight at the time of writing in favor or oral tradition is to completely undo the power of the Word of God.

Structure

Basic Synoptic Gospel Structure Outline

I. Introduction

II. Galilean Ministry

III. Jerusalem

The basic structure of Matthew as well as Mark and Luke is a quite simple three part progression. Each Gospel begins with the introductory material which includes a birth narrative (with the exception of Mark), baptism, and temptations. Then the greater portion of each Gospel is spent describing Jesus’ ministry in and around Galilee. Finally, each Gospel leads to Jerusalem and the events of the death, resurrection, final teachings, and ascension of Christ. Matthew, however, does not relate the ascension.

This structure is significantly different than that of the Gospel of John. Had it not been for John, we would have no knowledge that Jesus went to Jerusalem more than once as an adult, and it could easily appear that His whole ministry was accomplished in about a year. John’s Gospel records several visits to Jerusalem and the happenings there that are not recorded in the other Gospels.

Theology

Matthew’s theology is both Christocentric and Christological. He is Christocentric in that he presents Jesus as the ultimate theme of all Scripture and Christological in that he constantly affirms Jesus’ divinity.

From the outset of Matthew’s Gospel, the Christocentric message of Jesus is connected by genealogy to the Book of Genesis and by fulfillment to Isaiah’s prophecies of Messiah. As such, Jesus is the fulfillment of the prophets. In addition, Jesus is the perfect and absolute fulfillment of the Law. There is no question that Matthew intended to teach that Jesus is the embodiment of the Old Testament and all its promises and requirements. This not only connects Jesus to the past but the present realities and ramifications of such include deliverance from sin, foundations for living, salvation, and future hope.

Matthew’s Christology is intricately tied to the fulfillment of prophecy and his choice of Old Testament connections. Repeatedly, Jesus does things that are affirmed by the Old Testament as divine. Walking on water, healing the blind, and calming the storm are examples of this display of divinity. Even though John is often heralded above the other Gospels in Christological considerations, Matthew clearly demonstrates a thorough understanding of Jesus’ true identity. Like the parables, however, the meaning is not always apparent on the surface, but when the Old Testament references are properly understood, the demonstrations of divinity are quite pronounced especially to a Jewish audience familiar with the Scriptures.

Notes on the Introduction

Back to Table of Contents

Matthew 1

Genealogy (1:1-17)

1:1 The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.

1:2 Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas and his brethren;

1:3 And Judas begat Phares and Zara of Thamar; and Phares begat Esrom; and Esrom begat Aram;

1:4 And Aram begat Aminadab; and Aminadab begat Naasson; and Naasson begat Salmon;

1:5 And Salmon begat Booz of Rachab; and Booz begat Obed of Ruth; and Obed begat Jesse;

1:6 And Jesse begat David the king; and David the king begat Solomon of her that had been the wife of Urias;

1:7 And Solomon begat Roboam; and Roboam begat Abia; and Abia begat Asa;

1:8 And Asa begat Josaphat; and Josaphat begat Joram; and Joram begat Ozias;

1:9 And Ozias begat Joatham; and Joatham begat Achaz; and Achaz begat Ezekias;

1:10 And Ezekias begat Manasses; and Manasses begat Amon; and Amon begat Josias;

1:11 And Josias begat Jechonias and his brethren, about the time they were carried away to Babylon:

1:12 And after they were brought to Babylon, Jechonias begat Salathiel; and Salathiel begat Zorobabel;

1:13 And Zorobabel begat Abiud; and Abiud begat Eliakim; and Eliakim begat Azor;

1:14 And Azor begat Sadoc; and Sadoc begat Achim; and Achim begat Eliud;

1:15 And Eliud begat Eleazar; and Eleazar begat Matthan; and Matthan begat Jacob;

1:16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

1:17 So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; and from David until the carrying away into Babylon are fourteen generations; and from the carrying away into Babylon unto Christ are fourteen generations.

1:1 The very first verse of the New Testament readily identifies its audience as the Jewish people and also serves as a thesis statement for the introductory genealogy. It is doubtful that a first century Gentile reader would have had any particular affinity for this beginning, but the Jew would have readily recognized the historical implications here.

The book of the generation of is a reference to the Book of Genesis. Genesis uses the plural generations in setting up each of its eleven genealogical passages and is quite unique among all the literature of the Bible in its frequency of use. The fact that the word book is included in the formula here in Matthew, even narrows that reference further to the genealogy of Genesis 5. These two being the only references in the Bible that relate a book of generation(s). Thus, they are intricately connected. The genealogy in Genesis 5 is that of Adam. Here in Matthew it is of Jesus Christ. This connection, though only implied here, is more clearly illuminated in the writings of Paul in both Romans 5:12-21 and 1 Corinthians 15:21-22, 45-49.

The reference to David at the outset, is more than just a documentation of history both for the Jew and the modern Christian. For the Jew, it acknowledges the greatest king in the history of Israel. Even for the modern Jewish reader, the mention of David and then Abraham as natural ancestors to Jesus Christ bears upon the reality that Jesus was indeed Jewish both by nation and by birth. For the modern Christian, especially in the backdrop of doubts related to Biblical history, it is a strong message indicating that the Christ of Christianity has His basis in the history of the Bible. To negate that history is to negate the story of Jesus as it is all very intricately related.

The mention of David is also important here because it is the basis for fulfillment to many Old Testament prophecies. Many of the prophecies in the Old Testament are mentioned in the Book of Matthew and the ones related to Jesus as a King could not have been fulfilled had Jesus not been the legal heir of David’s throne. All of the first century Jews would have known this. In short, Matthew was not simply announcing a special person. He was announcing the prophesied King of Israel.

The mention of Abraham is more personal for the Jew and by New Testament extension for the Christian as well. David was from the tribe of Judah, and while he was a national hero to the people, he was not their father in a biological or national sense. Abraham was indeed their father (see John 8:33-58 and Romans 4:1-16). He was not only the biological father of the Jewish people, but he was also the covenant patriarch that received the promise of the land and the seed (Genesis 12:1-3, 7). In the New Testament (Romans 4:16) we learn that the fatherhood of Abraham is a fatherhood of faith that equally applies to Jewish and Gentile believers through faith in Christ.

1:2 Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob became the three patriarchs of the nation of Israel. Jacob had twelve sons who became the twelve tribal divisions of Israel. Judah (Judas here) was the tribe from which Christ came in the flesh.

1:3-5 Thamar (Tamar in Genesis) is the first of four women mentioned in this genealogy. Luke mentions none (Luke 3:23-38). The inclusion of women is not altogether unusual as many of the genealogies of Genesis mention women occasionally. The character and national identity of each of these women is of significance. We will deal with each they appear in the text.

Tamar is an unlikely inclusion because she was neither a Jew nor a virtuous woman (Genesis 38). While we are often unsure why something is in the Bible, we know that there is always purpose. Here we will propose two plausible reasons for her inclusion.

First, there has been some very poor teaching founded in racism related to the lineage of Christ. The idea is that Jesus came from a pure racial line. Those that adhere to such gross ignorance must surely gloss over the reality that the line would have been Semitic and non-Caucasian. Tamar (not to mention Rahab and Ruth) destroys that teaching because she was definitely not a Hebrew. She was most likely a Canaanite which would make her a descendant of Ham (Genesis 10:6). Not only was she descended from Ham, but specifically through Canaan, the recipient of the curse of Noah (Genesis 9:25). Tamar’s inclusion here is a very clear indication that Jesus is descended from a lineage that includes cursed people. There is no basis for racism in the Bible. We are all descended from Adam, and we are all of one blood (Acts 17:26). There are a number of statements in the Bible that seem to have no other purpose but to undo the false teachings of men. The inclusion of these women very well may be for that purpose.

Second, Tamar may have been included to demonstrate God’s providence in spite of man’s sinfulness. Genesis 38 tells the degraded story of Judah and Tamar’s sin. In the end, Judah said, She hath been more righteous than I (Genesis 38:26). In reality, neither was righteous in any regard. Fortunately, God does not require something righteous to start His work. He is perfectly capable of starting with sinful degradation on the path to glory. After all, it was sinful humanity that Jesus was coming to save.

On a soteriological note, just the way Matthew and Genesis lay bare the sins of men, we must lay our sins bare before God if we are expecting Him to forgive. Cover-up never does cover up. We will either come clean before Him now in search of mercy, or we will be exposed later without hope. Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight: but all things are naked and opened unto the eyes of him with whom we have to do (Hebrews 4:13).

The list of names from Phares to Jesse covers almost 900 years Israel’s history from the entrance into Egypt at the end of the book of Genesis (1876 BC) to the end of the period of the Judges (approx. 1000 BC), yet there are only nine generations listed. This is not an error in the Bible as some may wish to conclude. The Bible rarely makes any distinction between what we would consider father, grandfather, and ancestor. When it says that someone is the son of, it could mean literal son or it could mean grandson just the same. Often, several generations are skipped in genealogies of the Bible. This is particularly observable in the genealogies related to the captivity periods of Egypt and Babylon and the period of the Judges.

Rachab (Rahab in Joshua) is another interesting inclusion. She, like Tamar, was a Canaanite (or possibly an Amorite). She was not a descendant of Abraham. Her reputation as an harlot was not forgotten, yet her act of faith led to the preservation of her name in the heroes of faith of Hebrews 11:31 and in James 2:25. God has always been concerned to rescue the perishing who will come to Him in faith.

Ruth’s story is in the book that bears her name. She is yet another Gentile inclusion into the genealogy of Christ. She was a Moabite. Deuteronomy 23:3-5 forbids a Moabite from entering into the congregation of the Lord with the finality of for ever. We must understand the power of God’s cursing (Genesis 12:3) for the sake of Abraham. Moab hired Balaam to curse Israel and for that transgression became cursed themselves. Ruth, however, through marriage, was able to enter in much the same way that we enter the faith. Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God (Romans 7:4).

1:6 Here we see the beginning of a long list of kings which outline the history of the united monarchy of Israel and the kings of Judah during the divided kingdom. Her that had been the wife of Urias is a reference to Bathsheba. It is uncertain why her name is left out; nonetheless, she is the fourth woman in the genealogy. Her inclusion is interesting because it would appear that she was a Hebrew woman who was married to a Hittite. This, of course, was a forbidden marriage (Deuteronomy 7:1-3). The Hittite in the narrative turns out to put everyone else to shame in his devotion and faithfulness. The Bible does not comment on her willingness to participate in David’s failure. Again, the inclusion of her in this genealogy is indicative of God’s ability to work even in and through human sinfulness.

Solomon is where the genealogy of Luke diverges from the genealogy here. Luke traces the genealogy through David’s son Nathan rather than Solomon. It is commonly believed that Matthew traces the legal heritage of Jesus through Joseph, while Luke traces the biological lineage through Mary.

1:7-11 The list of kings here provides a very brief history that is the basis for the books of 1 & 2 Kings. The kingdom of Israel was divided during the reign of Rehoboam (Roboam). The Southern Kingdom became known as Judah and the Northern Kingdom is alternately called either Israel or Ephraim. Judah’s kings are listed here. The Northern Kingdom of Israel (Ephraim) was taken by Assyria during the reign of Ahaz (Achaz).

As mentioned earlier, genealogies often leave out names. When comparing Matthew 1:7-11 with 1 Chronicles 3:10-16, it becomes obvious that there have been some names left out in Matthew (Ahaziah, Joash, and Amaziah). This is only a problem if we require begat and son to be immediate generation. As an example, Jechonias (Jeconiah in 1 Chronicles) was the grandson of Josiah instead of his actual son (Jeremiah 37:1).

The deportation of the people of Judah was done in a few phases which may be why the phrase about the time is used in v. 11. The complete destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple was in 586 BC. This was done by Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon (2 Chronicles 36:17-21).

Before moving on, there is an important prophecy that must be addressed here. Jeremiah 22:30 says,

Thus saith the LORD, Write ye this man [Coniah] childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days: for no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah (see also Jeremiah 22:24-30).

Coniah in Jeremiah is the same as Jechonias here in Matthew. Though Jechonias was the legal heir of the throne, he was deposed and replace by his uncle, Zedekiah (Jeremiah 37:1). His children never did reign as kings in Jerusalem, yet the legal line of kings went through him. This makes the inclusion of Joseph in the life of Jesus all the more interesting because Joseph’s child would have been the legal heir to the kingdom of Israel, but if that child was biological, then the word of the Lord in Jeremiah 22:30 would have forbidden him. As it turns out, Jesus became the legal heir to the throne through the adoption of Joseph, but since he was not a biological child of Joseph (thus not a biological descendant of Jechonias), this prophecy does not apply to Him (see comment on Matthew 13:55-56).

1:12-15 Zorobabel here is the same as the man that led the people back to Jerusalem after a 70 year exile in Babylon and Medo-Persia (Ezra 2:1-2). It is also very unlikely that this is the same Zorobabel as is mentioned in Luke’s genealogy regardless of the similarity of names.

The remainder of the names covers a period of more than 500 years (536 BC to the birth of Jesus). The list is quite short (see above comments) for such a lengthy period that includes what is often referred to as the Intertestamental Period, the 400 year period between the Old and New Testaments.

1:16 As mentioned earlier, Joseph was the legal heir to the throne of David but neither he nor his biological descendants could occupy that throne because of the word of the Lord in Jeremiah 22:30.

The Gospel writers were very careful to demonstrate that Joseph was not the biological father of Jesus. The crowd was mistaken when they said Joseph was His father. Possibly, this indicates that Joseph and Mary did not openly proclaim the facts of Jesus’ peculiar birth (Matthew 13:55), but the Gospel writers understood and were careful to document such. Here we see the case in point. After a lengthy genealogy of begat after begat, Joseph’s relationship to Jesus is clearly different. He is described as having been the husband of Mary rather than the father of Jesus.

Jesus is called Christ. Christ is not so much a name as it is a title which means anointed. This is the same as the word Messiah.

1:17 In the counting of generations, the word all simply means all that are listed here. This is not an infrequent use of the word all in the New Testament. As an example, in Matthew 3:5-6, we learn that all Judaea went out to be baptized by John, but the very next verse reveals that the Pharisees and Sadducees did not submit to baptism. We must see this as a figurative statement of inclusion.

Some have argued over the counting saying that there are only 13 in one of the sets rather than 14. The answer to this is in the text of v. 17 itself. Counting from Abraham to David is 14, but one must start with David for the second set of 14 just as the text states. Then Jechonias begins the last 14 which culminates with Jesus.

The Birth of Jesus (1:18-25)

1:18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.

1:19 Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a publick example, was minded to put her away privily.

1:20 But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.

1:21 And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.

1:22 Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying,

1:23 Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.

1:24 Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife:

1:25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.

1:18 Matthew’s birth narrative is told from the perspective of Joseph and Luke’s narrative is clearly told from Mary’s. Such being the case, there is no mention of her experiences here other than the statement of fact that her pregnancy was of the Holy Ghost (see Luke 1:26-56 for Mary’s experiences).

Before they came together, makes certain that Joseph and Mary had never been intimate, and Mary was indeed a virgin. Biblical scholars who deny the virgin birth of Jesus stand in direct opposition to the Scriptures on this point!

This statement also infers that they indeed did come together eventually. This is important as it is in direct conflict with Catholic doctrine that states that Mary was born of a virgin and remained eternally a virgin herself. The fact of the matter is that she was neither. There is no Scriptural basis for the Immaculate Conception of Mary, and after the birth of Jesus, she was a normal wife in every way. This fact is demonstrated in that she clearly had several other children (compare Matthew 13:55 and 27:56). The Catholic teaching on Mary is not founded upon nor supported by the text of Scripture.

1:19 The culture and times were different then. Marital engagements were legally binding even before the marriage itself, and the terms husband and wife were used before the actual marriage as well (see. v. 20). It was necessary, therefore, for Joseph to put her away (divorce) rather than simply dissolve the engagement. His mind to do so privately speaks of his just character because Deuteronomy 22:23-24 would have required her death by stoning.

1:20 The angel of the Lord in the New Testament is quite different than the same expression in the Old Testament. Here it simply refers to an angelic being. Though there is no name given, this was quite possibly Gabriel (see Luke 1:19, 26).

Joseph is addressed as, Thou son of David. This reinforces both to Joseph and to the reader of Matthew that this child was to be a king. While Joseph was not told so specifically, Mary was (Luke 1:32-33).

Mary’s conception is again addressed, and for the second time, we are told that it is of the Holy Ghost.

This was all told to Joseph in a dream. Obviously, the Bible has several examples of people dreaming dreams of revelation. Joseph (in Genesis), Pharaoh, Nebuchadnezzar, and here Joseph. Of course, we are familiar with the expression of Joel (quoted by Peter on the day of Pentecost) about old men dreaming dreams. There is no doubt that dreams can bring revelation and that directly from God. With that being said, we should always be open to hearing from God in our dreams. At the same time, there are many who study dreams in ways that are not in accord with Scripture.