| Mt ch 1 | Mt 1:1 | Mt 1:2 | Mt 1:3 | Mt 1:4 | Mt 1:5 | Mt 1:6 | Mt 1:7 | Mt 1:8 | Mt 1:9 | Mt 1:10 | Mt 1:11 | Mt 1:12 | Mt 1:13 | Mt 1:14 | Mt 1:15 | Mt 1:16 | Mt 1:17 | Mt 1:18 | Mt 1:19 | Mt 1:20 | Mt 1:21 | Mt 1:22 | Mt 1:23 | Mt 1:24 | Mt 1:25 |
References
And Eliud begat Eleazar; and Eleazar begat Matthan; and Matthan begat Jacob; (Matthew 1:15 KJV)
and Eliud begat Eleazar; and Eleazar begat Matthan; and Matthan begat Jacob; (Matthew 1:15 ASV)
and Eliud begat Eliazar, and Eliazar begat Matthan, and Matthan begat Jacob, (Matthew 1:15 DBY)
and Eliud begat Eleazar, and Eleazar begat Matthan, and Matthan begat Jacob, (Matthew 1:15 YLT)
Eliud became the father of Eleazar. Eleazar became the father of Matthan. Matthan became the father of Jacob. (Matthew 1:15 WEB)
Interlinear
Mt 1:15 And /de/ Eliud /Elioud/ begat /gennao/ Eleazar; /Eleazar/ and /de/ Eleazar /Eleazar/ begat /gennao/ Matthan; /Matthan/ and /de/ Matthan /Matthan/ begat /gennao/ Jacob; /Iakob/
Matthew Poole’s Commentary
Verse 13-15. Here are divers objections made to this last part of the genealogy, and in a great measure caused from the difference between Matthew and Luke; but I shall not attempt any reconciliation of those differences till I come to Lu 3:23-38. There is no Abiud reckoned amongst the sons of Zorobabel, 1Ch 3:19,20; and for the others named, we have no certain account of them in any part of the holy writ. From the time of Jehoiakim were above five hundred years to the birth of Christ, of which seventy were spent in the captivity of Babylon.
Zorobabel was alive at the end of the captivity, Ezr 5:2, and, as it appears, the ruler of the Jews, though not under the title and style of king. For Eliakim, Azor, Sadoc, Achim, Eliud, Eleazar, Matthan, and Jacob, though we have no mention of them in any canonical books of holy writ but only this, yet Matthew’s credit in the church of God ought to out weigh any other writings, pretending any thing contrary to what he saith; we are therefore obliged to believe they all lineally descended from David, but, living in a private state and condition, and holy writ not extending its history beyond Zorobabel’s time, (the time when the Jews came out of Babylon), it is no wonder that we have no better means than we have from holy writ to know their lineal descent from the royal family.
That Matthew in what he wrote was guided by the unerring Spirit, and that he had rolls of pedigrees which we want, we have reason to believe. This is enough for us Christians, who own the books of the New as well as the Old Testament to be wrote by persons Divinely inspired; so, as to them, we have nothing to do but to reconcile Matthew and Luke, both whom we own to have had the same infallible inspiration and direction. If Jews or pagans argue from any other topic than this, it is enough to tell them, that the Jews kept exact genealogies, and more especially as to the descents in the tribes of Judah and Levi, that they might never be at loss as to the Messiah, whom they expected as the Son of David, nor yet as to the true high priest. Though these records and rolls of genealogy be now lost, yet we have no reason to believe they were so in Matthew’s time; of which genealogies (as to this part) doubtless what Matthew saith was but a copy, directed by that Holy Spirit by which he was inspired.