ACC ~ Luke 3 v23 - 38
OVERVIEW:
Thirty was the age of David when he began his reign as king of Israel, [1] so Jesusâ age suggests that he is the son of David, who will inherit âthe throne of his father David.â [2] Joseph was thirty years old when he began his service to the pharaoh [3] (ORIGEN). The qualifying statement âbeing a son, as was supposedâ affirms the virgin birth of Jesus in the genealogy and articulates one of its themes: that Jesus is not Josephâs son but the Son of God (AMBROSE). The genealogy teaches us the fleshly line of Jesus Christ, son of Adam and Son of God (PRUDENTIUS). The genealogy is that of Joseph, since for the Jews the generations of a family are always listed through the husband. Some commentators suggest that Matthew gives the royal line of descent from David, while Luke names the priestly descent, for Jesus is King and Priest, and Lukeâs Gospel is represented by a calf. Lukeâs placement of the genealogy right after Jesusâ baptism suggests that henceforth baptism into Christ will be the new birth into the new family of God (AMBROSE).
Significant names begin some of the lists, that is, David, Abraham and Enoch, and the final, seventy-eighth name is God. Luke includes other significant Old Testament saints, particularly those who were known for their righteousness before God. Matthew, unlike Luke, begins Jesusâ genealogy with Abraham (AMBROSE) and includes in it women (Tamar, Ruth, Rahab and Uriahâs wife), some of whom were known for their sinful behavior (ORIGEN).
[1] 2 Sam 5:4.
[2] Lk 1:33.
[3] Gen 41:46.
3:23-38 | JesusâSon of Adam, Son of God
THE NUMBER THIRTY HAS GREAT THEOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE
ORIGEN: But also if you who hear these words direct your thoughts to the holy Scriptures in your leisure, you will discover many great events to be comprised under the number thirty or fifty. Joseph was thirty years old when he was led out of prison and received the rule of all Egypt that he might divert the calamity of an imminent famine by divine provision. [1] Jesus is reported to have been thirty years old when he came to baptism. HOMILIES ON GENESIS 2.5. [2]
[1] See Gen 41:46.
[2] FC 71:83-84.
JOSEPH WAS THOUGHT TO BE JESUSâ FATHER
AMBROSE: It benefits no one to change what is written: âWho was thought to be the son of Joseph.â For it was right that he was âthoughtâ so, because he was not the Josephâs son by nature but was thought to be his Son, because he was born of Mary, who was engaged to Joseph, her husband. So you have: âIs not this Joseph the carpenterâs son?â [1] EXPOSITION OF THE GOSPEL OF LUKE 3.2. [2]
THE FLESHLY LINE OF SON OF ADAM, SON OF GOD
PRUDENTIUS:
What do you say about the sacred words of Luke
When he the genealogy repeats,
The fleshly line retracing through old sires?
Up generations seventy-two
Christ mountsâso many teachers into the world
He sentâand by the steps down to his birth
Goes back to Adam, head of earthly flesh.
The Father then receives his Son and us,
And Adam son of God becomes through Christ.
Nothing now remains but that you deem this race
Unreal, Levi, Judah, Simeon,
King David, other mighty kings, unreal,
The virginâs swelling womb itself grown big
With lying vapor, flimsy clouds and mist.
That airy blood dissolves, the bones grow soft
And melt, the trembling muscles disappear.
That every deed the idle wind dispels,
The breezes scatter, all an empty tale.
THE DIVINITY OF CHRIST 1001-18. [3]
[1] Mt 13:55.
[2] :1â24:53 PRELIMINARY REMARKS | ON THE GOSPEL
[3] FC 52:37-38.
WHY THIS IS JOSEPHâS GENEALOGY
AMBROSE: You see that the description of descent is connected by the old custom from the fathers to the sons and from the sons to the fathers. You see that the family is everywhere listed through the generations of the husband. Do not marvel if Matthew reports the order of the generations from Abraham to Joseph, and Luke from Joseph to Adam and to God. Do not marvel that Josephâs lineage is described. Indeed, being born according to the flesh, he must follow the usage of the flesh, and he who came into the world must be described in the custom of the world, particularly as the lineage of Mary is also in the lineage of Joseph. For since Joseph was a righteous man, he took a wife from his own tribe and his own country, nor could a righteous man contravene what is prescribed in the law. [1] âThe inheritance of the people of Israel shall not be transferred from one tribe to another. For every one of the people of Israel shall cleave to the inheritance of the tribe of his fathers. Every daughter who possesses an inheritance in any tribe of the people of Israel shall be wife to one of the family of the tribe of her father, so that every one of the people of Israel may possess the inheritance of his fathers.â [2] Therefore, also at the time of the enrollment, Joseph went up from his house and the country of David to be enrolled with Mary his wife. [3] She who enrolls from the same house and the same country surely signifies that she is of this same tribe and this same country. EXPOSITION OF THE GOSPEL OF LUKE 3.4. [4]
[1] See Num 4:1.
[2] Num 36:6-8.
[3] Lk 2:4-5.
[4] EHG 82-83**.
MATTHEW SHOWS A ROYAL LINE, LUKE A PRIESTLY ONE
AMBROSE: Here too some ⌠raise issues: that Matthew counted forty-two generations from Abraham to Christ, [1] but Luke fifty, and that Matthew reported that the generation descended through some persons, and Luke mentioned others. In this matter, you can test what we said. Although Matthew wove some forefathers of the divine lineage, but Luke others, into the order of generation, nevertheless each indicated that the remaining ancestors were from the race of Abraham and David. Matthew thought the generation should be derived through Solomon, [2] but Luke through Nathan. This fact seems to show both a royal and a priestly family of Christ. We should not consider one account truer than the other, but that the one agrees with the other in equal faith and truth. According to the flesh, Jesus was truly of a royal and priestly family, King from kings, Priest from priests. Although the prophecy pertains not to the carnal but the celestial, since a King exults in the power of God, [3] to whom judgment is committed by the King, his Father, [4] and a Priest is forever. Accordingly it is written, âYou are a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek.â [5] Then, each fittingly kept faith, so that Matthew established his origin led through kings, and Luke, by deriving the lineage of his race transmitted through priests from God to Christ, declared his very descent the more holy. At the same time, the image of a calf is indicated, in so much as he thinks the priestly mystery must be preserved. EXPOSITION OF THE GOSPEL OF LUKE 3.12-13. [6]
[1] Mt 1:2-17.
[2] Mt 1:6-7.
[3] Ps 21:1 (20:1 LXX).
[4] See Jn 5:22.
[5] Ps 110:4 (109:4 LXX).
[6] EHG 87-88**.
LUKE ECHOES JESUSâ BAPTISM
AMBROSE: Therefore Luke also thought that his origin should be traced back to God. Because God is the true Father of Christ, either the Father according to the true generation or the Author of the mystical giftâaccording to the regeneration of baptism. Furthermore, he did not start by describing his generation but first set forth his baptism. He desired to show him as God, the Author of all, weaving everything together through baptism. He also stated that Christ derived from God in the order of succession, in order to prove him the Son of God according to nature, according to grace and according to the flesh. Then what clearer evidence is there of divine generation than that before speaking of Jesusâ generation, Luke has the Father himself saying, âThis is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleasedâ? [1] EXPOSITION OF THE GOSPEL OF LUKE 3.11. [2]
[1] Cf. Mt 3:17.
[2] EHG 87*.
LUKE INCLUDES SIGNIFICANT OLD TESTAMENT FIGURES IN HIS GENEALOGY
AMBROSE: He could not include more sons of Jacob, lest he seem to digress outside the generations in an irrelevant series. Of course, in the case of other, that is, distant, descendants of the patriarchs, Luke did not think the names should be omitted, but that those of Joseph, Judah, Simeon and Levi should be preferred beyond the rest. We know that there were four kinds of virtues in those from whom they were descended. In Judah, the mystery of the Lordâs passion was prefigured. [1] In Joseph, an example of chastity went before. [2] In Simeon, the payment for violated virginity was represented. [3] In Levi, the office of a priest was symbolized. [4] We observe the dignity of prophecy manifested also through Nathan so that because Christ Jesus is one and all, [5] diverse kinds of virtues went before also in individual forefathers. EXPOSITION OF THE GOSPEL OF LUKE 3.47. [6]
[1] See Gen 49:10-12.
[2] See Gen 39:7-15.
[3] See Gen 34:25-31; cf. Jdt 9:2-4.
[4] See Num 3:6.
[5] Col 3:11.
[6] EHG 108-9*.
UNLIKE LUKE, MATTHEW LISTS WOMEN WHO ARE SINNERS IN HIS GENEALOGY
ORIGEN: Matthew, who makes him descend from the heavenly regions, mentions womenânot any women at all, but sinners, and those whom Scripture had reproved. But Luke, who tells of Jesus at his baptism, mentions no woman. Matthew, as we said, names Tamar, who by deception lay with her father-in-law. Ruth was not from the race of Israel. I cannot discover where Rahab was taken from. The wife of Uriah violated her husbandâs bed. For our Lord and Savior had come for this end, to take upon himself humankindâs sins. God âmade him who had committed no sin to be sin for our sake.â [1] For this reason, he came down into the world and took on the person of sinners and depraved people. He willed to be born from the stock of Solomon, whose sins have been recorded, [2] and from Rehoboam, whose transgressions are reported, [3] from the rest of them, many of whom âdid evil in the sight of the Lord.â [4] HOMILIES ON THE GOSPEL OF LUKE 28.2. [5]
[1] 2 Cor 5:21.
[2] 1 Kings 11:6-8.
[3] 1 Kings 14:21-31.
[4] 1 Kings 15:26, 34.
[5] FC 94:115-16*.
WHY LUKEâS ENUMERATION DIFFERS FROM MATTHEWâS
AMBROSE: Yet it seems needful to explain why St. Matthew began to enumerate the descent of Christ from Abraham but St. Luke led it from Christ up to God. But first I think we should not set aside by any means the question why St. Matthew, when he began the order of descent from Abraham, did not say, âThe Book of the Generation of Abraham,â but âThe Book of the Generation of Jesus Christ, the Son of David, the Son of Abraham.â [1] Why he named these two in particular. âŚ
The Evangelist selected those two authors of the race, the one who received the promise concerning the congregation of the nations, the other who obtained the prophecy of the generation of Christ. Although he is later in the order of the succession, yet he is described before Abraham in the generation of the Lord, because it is more to have received the promise concerning Christ than that concerning the church, since the church itself is through Christ. Then there is one prince of the race according to the flesh, and another according to the spirit. The one is a prince by grace of children, the other through the faith of the peoples. For greater is he who saves than he who is saved. Hence he is called âthe Son of David,â âthe Book of the Generation of Jesus Christ, the Son of David.â [2] EXPOSITION OF THE GOSPEL OF LUKE 3.6, 10. [3]
[1] Mt 1:1.
[2] Mt 1:1.
[3] EHG 83-84, 86-87**.