The Geneology Of The Messiah

NOTE: On this webpage, I will only quote Scripture from the Israeli Authorised Version (I.A.V.) translation. This is because I do not believe that any Orthodox Jewish people would have any desputes about the verses I will quote on this page that are quoted from The Tanakh, and I want to simplify this complex issue as much as possible:

There are those whom are critical of the geneology of Yehowshua. Here are their claims:

A) "Since the geneology lists in Matthew and Luke differ, they contradict each other".

B) "Matthew lists Ykhanyahu,a cursed king in Mattityahu 1:12. Note Yermeyahu 22:28-30":

Jer 22:28 Is this man Coniah a despised broken idol? is he a vessel wherein is no pleasure? wherefore are they cast out, he and his seed, and are cast into a land which they know not?

Jer 22:29 O earth, earth, earth, hear the word of ADONAI.

Jer 22:30 Thus saith ADONAI, Write ye this man 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 Yhudah.

The answer is that Mattityahu is not necessarily giving a list of the literal fathers and their literal physical sons, let-alone their orders. Mattityahu is giving the Kingly line going throush Yosef. Most of the names after David were found to be kings of Yhudah in 1st Chronicles chapter 3. Note the Law of Yabam in Devarim 25...

Devarim 25:5

If brethren dwell together, and one of them die, and have no child, the wife of the dead shall not marry without unto a stranger: her husband's brother shall go in unto her, and take her to him to wife, and perform the duty of an husband's brother unto her.

Devarim 25:6

And it shall be, that the firstborn which she beareth shall succeed in the name of his brother which is dead, that his name be not put out of Yisrael.

Compare this with Yermeyahu 22:30 about Ykhanyahu:

Yermeyahu 22:30

Thus saith ADONAI, Write ye this man 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 Yhudah.

With all this in-mind, the key here is 2 Kings 24:15--17...

2Ki 24:15 And he carried away Yhoyakhin to Bavel, and the king's mother, and the king's wives, and his officers, and the mighty of the land, those carried he into captivity from Yerushalayim to Bavel.

2Ki 24:16 And all the men of might, even seven thousand, and craftsmen and smiths a thousand, all that were strong and apt for war, even them the king of Bavel brought captive to Bavel.

2Ki 24:17 And the king of Bavel made Mattaniah his father's brother king in his stead, and changed his name to Tzidkiyah-yahu.

CONCLUSION: Ykhanyahu is listed in Mattyahu 1:12 because he was THE LITERAL SEED that SHOULD HAVE BEEN COUNTED as heir. However, as the above verses indicate, He was blotted-out OF THE ROYAL REGISTRY OF KINGS, and replaced with Tzidkiyah-yahu, (2 Kings 24:17). Tzidkiyah-yahu thus became THE LEGAL HEIR to The Throne instead of Ykhanyahu. Mattityahu lists Ykhanyahu because he WAS SUPPOSED to be the legal Heir to The Throne, but because of his sins, he was blotted-out. Here, the principle of The Law of Yabbam, (Devarim 25:5, 6) applies CONCERNING THE THRONE. Yoshiyah-yahu had four sons, Yohanan,Yhoyakhim, Tzidkiyah-yahu, Shallum (1st Chronicles 3:15). When Yhoyakhim's seed was blotted-out, they were as good as dead CONCERNING THE THRONE, and (2 Kings 24:17), the brother Tzidkiyah-yahu raised up seed in his place.

The geneological list in Luke also goes through Yosef, but does not give the royal line of Kings. This is why some of the names are different.

Concerning Isaiah 7:14 and the virgin birth:

Therefore ADONAI himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a maiden shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name ImmanuEl.

The Hebrew word "`almah" literally means "maiden" or "young woman" . Note here the I.A.V. renders it "maiden". It is true that this verse in-context may have been fulfilled to some degree in one of Isaiah's children. However, there is absolutely no indication that the Hebrew word "'almah" is used anywhere in The Tanakh of a woman whom was not a virgin. Here, it is important to remember what I said in the link "The Gentiles Would Seek The Messiah, And Yisra'el Would Rebel Against Him", where I said that the same patterns and Principles that had some fulfillment in earlier Jewish history often apply to the end-times as well, because G-d does not change. But the most important part of this issue is that it has already been proven in other links on this website that The Messiah would be a Divine Being. It has already been proven FROM THE HEBREW TANAKH that:

A) The Messiah must be GREATER in-terms of His Priesthood THAN EVEN The Levim,though he is from The Tribe of Yhudah. The Levim could not receive Sanctification without His Sacrifice. This is the probably the most convincing evidence. Any Orthodox Jewish man would probably know that in The Torah, THE ONLY MORTALS ALLOWED anywhere near The Most Holy Place of The Tabernacle were The Levim! Think of Yom Kippur!

B) Being the final King, and would be Reigning on The Throne forever, thus He has immortality.

C) He would die for the sins of Yisra'el. (Keep in-mind that the sacrifice of a mere mortal for this reason would be pagan).

D) The Tetragrammatton is applied to Him, (Yermeyahu 23:5,6).

E) The Messiah would come twice.

THEREFORE, these all collectively prove that The Messiah had to have a virgin birth when He came the first time to Sanctify us. Had he been the literal physical seed of any mortal, He would have inherited sin, and then He would not have been qualified to have been The Messiah. Also, the Greek word "Parthenos" in Mattiyahu 1:23 can also mean "maiden" or "young woman". With all of this in-mind, no believer has to depend on soley Isaiah 7:14 to prove the virgin birth of Yehowshua.

One final point: Why didn't Mattityahu Tell us this in Mattityahu 1:12? I cannot prove this, but I strongly believe that much of The New Testament (The 4 Gospels, Acts,Hebrews, Ya`akov ("James"), 1, 2, 3 Yochanan, Yhudah ("Jude"), and probably Revelation were Originally Written in Hebrew Manuscripts. This is only logical, because in these Books, Yisra'elim ("Jewish people") were being addressed, and there must have been some Jewish scholars who still had knowledge of Hebrew. I believe what we have today are the Greek translations, but that for the above reason, there were original Hebrew Manuscripts. Therefore, I believe that in the Originals, this issue would have been addressed. Why do I believe is the reason they weren't found to date yet? Very simple, there were people on all sides whom would have had the motivation and desire to supress such Manuscripts: The Romans certainly because they would have wanted to destroy any Jewish hope of liberation. Concerning the Jewish leaders and their followers that rejected Yehowshua and hated Him, they certainly wanted to destroy the faith of Jewish people believing in Him. So there were plenty of people on all sides whom would have had the desire and motivation to destroy or hide such Manuscripts.