Joseph Francis Alward
|
Because creation lasted six days and
god rested on the seventh, the number “seven” is perhaps the most sacred in the
Old Testament. Likewise, multiples of seven are part of what Old Testament
writers regarded as a “divine arithmetic.” Thus, one speaks of a “week” of
days, or a “week” of years (seven years). The prophet Daniel, for example,
predicted that there would be a period of seventy weeks (490 years) from the
end of the Babylonian exile until the coming of the messiah (Daniel 9:24-27).
Randel Helms, author of Gospel Fictions (Prometheus Books, page 46-47),
explains why Matthew at 1:1-17 lists three groups of fourteen descendents
stretching from Abraham to Jesus:
Fourteen equals two "weeks" of generations, and three two week periods (14 +14+14) equal six 'weeks' of pre-Christian generations in the royal line of Israel; thus, with Jesus begins the seventh, the 'sabbath' week of Jewish monarchical history--the kingdom, restored under Christ.
As we shall see below, Matthew,
apparently in a misguided belief that Jesus' genealogy should contain a
prophetic numerical pattern based on divine "weeks," forced the second
group to have two weeks (fourteen) of names by simply omitting three names. In
the left column of the table below is listed a partial list of descendants
taken from 1 Chronicles 3:9-15. In the
right column is Matthew’s contrived list, taken from Matthew1:1-16.
Genealogy from 1 Chronicles |
Genealogy from Matthew 1 |
1 David |
1 David |
2 Solomon |
2 Solomon |
3 Rehoboam |
3 Rehoboam |
4 Abijah |
4 Abijah |
5 Asa |
5 Asa |
6 Jehoshaphat |
6 Jehoshaphat |
7 Jehoram |
7 Jehoram |
8 Ahaziah |
……missing |
9 Joash |
……missing |
10 Amaziah |
……missing |
11 Uzziah |
8 Uzziah |
12 Jotham |
9 Jotham |
13 Ahaz |
10 Ahaz |
14 Hezekiah |
11 Hezekiah |
15 Manasseh |
12 Manasseh |
16 Amon |
13 Amon |
17 Josiah |
14 Josiah |
The Old Testament shows that from David until the carrying away into Babylon
are seventeen generations, not fourteen. The three names underlined in
the 1 Chronicles genealogy seem to have been deliberately snipped out to fit the
imagined or hoped-for prophecy pattern.
Apologists sometimes argue that Matthew
did what apologists mistakenly and hopefully think was “common” in those
days—omitting descendents who were “unimportant.” However, even if this
practice was common (it wasn’t), it is not as if these men were not important;
all three of them were kings, and all three were in the line of descendancy to
the son of God—if you can believe Matthew. How could kings who were the alleged
ancestors of Jesus not be important?
We will perhaps never know whether
Matthew deliberately omitted the three names from his genealogy, or whether the
sources upon which he based his writings were incomplete or corrupted. Either
way, it is evident that there were not fourteen generations from David to the
time of the exile into Babylon; there were seventeen.
By the way, the problem with Matthew’s
list is more severe than what is described here, but I’ve chosen to simplify
the argument so that apologists might better be able to focus their attention
on one problem at a time. Experience teaches that apologists seize every
opportunity to obfuscate when they find they’re unable to harmonize a Bible
difficulty, and the more complicated the skeptic’s argument is, the more hiding
places there are for the Bible believer.
Click here
for a fuller exposition of the problem.