Matthew 1

Summary

Matthew opens his Gospel by presenting Jesus as the promised Messiah, the Son of David and Son of Abraham. Through the genealogy, the announcement to Joseph, and the birth of Christ, Matthew begins showing how Jesus fulfils God’s promises to Israel.

The Christ

The title Christ comes from the Greek Christos (Χριστός), meaning “anointed one,” and corresponds to the Hebrew title Messiah. Anointing had an important place in Israel - kings (1 Samuel 16:13) and priests (Leviticus 8:12) were anointed for their ministries, and Scripture also speaks of prophetic anointing (1 Kings 19:16). The title therefore carries much more meaning than simply being another name for Jesus.

The Catechism points out that Jesus fulfils these expectations together: as Messiah He is anointed by the Spirit as king, priest and prophet (CCC 436, Isaiah 61:1). This becomes particularly visible at His baptism, when the Holy Spirit descends upon Him like a dove (Matthew 3:16–17). Jesus does not become the Christ at this moment. Rather, the baptism manifests His messianic identity as His public ministry begins.

Matthew’s use of the title at the beginning of the Gospel is therefore significant. Before the genealogy has even begun, Matthew has already told us what he intends to show that Jesus is the Messiah. The genealogy that follows immediately begins establishing that claim by identifying Him as the son of David and son of Abraham (2 Samuel 7:12–16).

Matthew’s genealogy is more than a family record. It is a theological declaration that Jesus is the promised Messiah, the Son of Abraham through whom the nations would be blessed, and the Son of David whose kingdom would endure forever. As Chrysostom also observes, ”[…] Also because Christ was to have three dignities, King, Prophet, Priest;” (Catena Aurea, St. Thomas Aquinas (quoting St. John Chrysostom)).

The Genealogy of Jesus Christ

To modern readers, a genealogy may appear to be little more than a list of names. Throughout the Old Testament, however, genealogies establish identity, inheritance, covenant continuity, priestly service, and royal descent. They connect individuals to God’s promises across generations. Genealogies could also carry assumptions about a person’s character, as people were sometimes associated with traits traditionally attributed to their ancestors or tribe. They could also establish a person’s ancestry and status within Israel.

Matthew therefore begins his Gospel by showing that Jesus stands within Israel’s history as the promised Son of Abraham and Son of David, whose coming fulfils God’s covenant promises. This is also why the genealogy opens the Gospel rather than being treated as an appendix.

God told Abraham “I will make you exceedingly fruitful; and I will make nations of you and kings shall come from you.” (Genesis 17:6), later God had told David that would make a covenant forever with him and that, “Your house and your kingdom shall be made sure for ever before me, your throne shall be established for ever.” (2 Samuel 7:16).

Matthew’s opening also recalls Genesis. Just as Genesis records “the book of the generations of Adam,” Matthew begins with “the book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ.” Rabanus Maurus understands Matthew’s opening as an intentional contrast between the first Adam, through whom sin entered the world, and Christ, the new Adam, through whom creation is restored.

He says, The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, because he knew it was written, ‘The book of the generation of Adam.’ He begins thus then, that he may oppose book to book, the new Adam to the old Adam, for by the one were all things restored which had been corrupted by the other.

Catena Aurea, St. Thomas Aquinas (quoting Rabanus Maurus)

The Women in the Genealogy

There are some interesting aspects of Matthew’s genealogy, one of them being the inclusion of four women: Tamar, Rahab, Ruth and the wife of Uriah. The Ignatius Catholic Study Bible notes that the inclusion of women in a Jewish genealogy was unusual, though not unprecedented. Several of these women also have connections with the Gentile world: Rahab was from Jericho, Ruth was a Moabite, Tamar is commonly understood to have been Canaanite, and Matthew refers to Bathsheba through her marriage to Uriah the Hittite.

There is another interesting pattern in their stories. Tamar, Rahab and Bathsheba are all connected with circumstances involving sexual scandal or irregularity, although this does not mean that Matthew is presenting the women themselves as sexually immoral. Tamar, for example, is ultimately described by Judah as more righteous than himself (Genesis 38:26), while in the story of Bathsheba it is David whom Scripture explicitly condemns (2 Samuel 11:27).

Saint Jerome sees another significance in the inclusion of sinners within Jesus’ ancestry, saying that Christ “who came for sinners being born of sinners might put away the sins of all” (Catena Aurea, St. Thomas Aquinas (quoting St. Jerome)). This brings to mind Jesus’ own words later in Matthew that He came “not to call the righteous, but sinners” (Matthew 9:13).

I think there is something beautiful here. Jesus, the new Adam, willingly entered a family history marked by sin and by the effects of humanity’s fall. The One who came to redeem humanity did not stand apart from its broken story but entered into it in order to restore it. Even at the very beginning of Matthew’s Gospel, the genealogy already points us towards the kind of people Christ came to save.

Differences in Genealogy

It may be important to note some differences between the Genealogy of Jesus as shown in the Gospel of Matthew and the one as shown in the Gospel of Luke. One traditional explanation, reflected in the Ignatius Study Bible, is that Matthew traces Joseph’s legal ancestry while Luke preserves Mary’s family line. Other explanations have also been proposed throughout Christian history. For comparison:

Matthew (Matthew 1:2-16)	Luke (Luke 3:23-38)
David → Solomon	David → Nathan
Jacob → Joseph	Heli → Joseph

The website adam2jesus provides a useful visual comparison of the two genealogies. Saint Jerome also explains this difference,

[…] Matthew calls Joseph the son of Jacob, Luke makes him the son of Heli. He did not know the Scripture manner, one was his father by nature, the other by law. For we know that God commanded by Moses, that if a brother or near kinsman died without children, another should take his wife, to raise up seed to his brother or kinsman (Deut. 25.)[…]

Catena Aurea, St. Thomas Aquinas (quoting St. Jerome)

Jerome therefore presents a different explanation from the view that Luke records Mary’s ancestry. On this interpretation, both genealogies concern Joseph, but Jacob and Heli could both be described as his father in different senses: one according to natural descent and the other according to legal descent.

The Fourteen Generations

Matthew clearly makes an effort to emphasise the number fourteen, dividing the genealogy into three groups of fourteen generations (Matthew 1:17). It may also be significant that, counting Abraham as the first name, David is the fourteenth name in the genealogy.

The Ignatius Catholic Study Bible points out another interesting connection with David. In Hebrew, the numerical value of the three consonants in David’s name is fourteen: D = 4, V = 6, D = 4. This raises the possibility that Matthew’s repeated use of fourteen is another way of drawing attention to David and, ultimately, to Jesus as the Son of David.

The three groups of fourteen also give the symbolic total of forty-two. I am less certain whether Matthew intends any further significance with this number, but the repeated pattern itself is clearly deliberate. Matthew even draws the reader’s attention to it explicitly at the end of the genealogy.

There may therefore be several layers to Matthew’s use of fourteen. We can say with certainty that Matthew deliberately structures the genealogy around the number; the connection between fourteen and the numerical value of David’s name provides a plausible explanation for why he chose it. Given Matthew’s repeated emphasis on Jesus as the Son of David, I think there is good reason to see the pattern as another way of emphasising Jesus’ Davidic and messianic identity.

Some textual traditions also describe David explicitly as “the king” in Matthew 1:6, while Jesus is identified as the one “who is called Christ” in Matthew 1:16. Whether or not every numerical detail can be fully explained, Matthew clearly wants his readers to see Jesus as the long-awaited Son of David and the fulfilment of God’s covenant promises.

The Birth of Jesus

Betrothal

In Matthew 1:18 it says that Mary was betrothed to Joseph. The IVP Bible Commentary mentions that usually the betrothal process would require at least two testimonies and could also involve financial arrangements such as a bride-price. The betrothal period could last up to a year and could allow the betrothed pair to live together, although this may have been less common in Galilee, where such arrangements appear to have been frowned upon.

Betrothal was more serious than a promise or modern engagement. It was already legally binding. Because of this, ending the betrothal required a divorce. If one of the betrothed died before the marriage was completed, the surviving partner could even be regarded as a widow or widower.

Joseph Divorce Decision

Various translations render Matthew 1:19 somewhat differently. The NRSV describes Joseph as a “righteous man” who was unwilling to expose Mary to public disgrace, while the RSV-2CE describes him as a “just man” who was unwilling to put Mary to shame. The Catena Aurea likewise uses “just man” and says that he was unwilling to make Mary a public example.

It may be worth pointing out that the different renderings of “righteous” and “just” stem from the same Greek word dikaios (δίκαιος).

According to the IVP Bible Background Commentary, divorce could take place publicly or more privately. Since divorce required a document, Joseph could provide Mary with the document of divorce without publicly bringing charges against her.

Given what we have learned about the betrothal process, it’s understandable that Joseph was planning to divorce Mary. The Law treated adultery during betrothal as a serious offence Deuteronomy 22:23-24.

According to the Ignatius Catholic Study Bible, three interpretations have been proposed within Catholic tradition for why Joseph intended to divorce Mary:

• Suspicion theory - Joseph naturally assumes that Mary has become pregnant by another man. As a righteous observer of the Law he intends to divorce her, but his mercy leads him to do so quietly rather than publicly exposing her.
• Perplexity theory - Joseph does not know how Mary became pregnant and is uncertain what to do. Unable to understand the situation, he decides that quietly withdrawing from the marriage is the appropriate course until the angel explains it.
• Reverence theory - Joseph knows or believes that Mary’s pregnancy is the work of God and considers himself unworthy to participate in something so holy, so he intends to withdraw.

See the annotated patristic quotes or examples of how early Christian writers interpreted Joseph’s decision.

Matthew does not explicitly tell us what Joseph knew or suspected before the angel appeared to him, so each interpretation attempts to explain his decision from the details Matthew provides.

The Angel Appears to Joseph

While Joseph was considering what to do, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream (Matthew 1:20). Dreams were one of the ways in which God communicated throughout the Old Testament, and there is an interesting parallel here with the patriarch Joseph, who also received revelation through dreams (Genesis 37:5-11). This is only the beginning of a number of similarities between the two Josephs that become more apparent as Matthew’s account continues.

It may also be important that the angel does not simply address him as Joseph, but as “Joseph, son of David.” This brings David back into the narrative at the very moment Joseph is told to take Mary as his wife. As a descendant of David, Joseph has an important role in establishing Jesus within the Davidic line, recalling God’s promise that David’s house and kingdom would endure (2 Samuel 7:12-16).

Saint John Chrysostom also noticed the significance of the angel’s words. He understood “son of David” as deliberately reminding Joseph of David and the promise of the Messiah. The angel then tells Joseph not to fear taking Mary “thy wife.” Chrysostom draws attention to this wording as well:

Now having mentioned her name, he stayed not at this, but added also, thy wife; whereas he would not have called her so, if she had been corrupted.

St. John Chrysostom, Homilies on the Gospel of St. Matthew, Homily IV

The Name of Jesus

The angel does not leave the naming of the child to Joseph, but tells him, “you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins” (Matthew 1:21). The name Jesus comes from the Hebrew name Yeshua, related to Joshua, and carries the meaning “the LORD saves” or “the LORD is salvation.” Matthew therefore connects Jesus’ name directly with His mission: He comes to save His people from their sins.

Saint John Chrysostom draws attention to the fact that the name itself is given by God:

[…] God that sends down His name from above […]

St. Thomas Aquinas, Catena Aurea (quoting Chrysostom)

There is something particularly interesting about what follows. Matthew tells us that all this took place to fulfil the prophecy of Isaiah: “Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and his name shall be called Emmanuel” (Isaiah 7:14), which Matthew translates as “God with us” (Matthew 1:23).

We therefore encounter two names with theological significance at the end of Matthew’s first chapter. Jesus tells us something about what He has come to do: He will save His people from their sins. Emmanuel tells us something about His presence among us: God is with us.

Saint John Chrysostom also noticed that Matthew does not say that Joseph would name Him Emmanuel. Instead, he understands the prophecy as describing what people would come to recognise through Jesus:

As it is the manner of Scripture to convey a knowledge of events under the form of a name, so here, They shall call His name Emmanuel, means nothing else than, They shall see God among men. Whence he says not, ‘Thou shalt call’, but, They shall call.

St. Thomas Aquinas, Catena Aurea (quoting Chrysostom)

I find the meaning of these two names particularly beautiful. The Word did not simply become incarnate and dwell among humanity: He came to save. Jesus is “the LORD saves” and Emmanuel is “God with us.” At the very beginning of his Gospel, Matthew has already begun to tell us both who Jesus is and what He has come to do.