Home » Biblical Theology » The First Word of the New Testament Matters

The First Word of the New Testament Matters

Photo of author
Written By Tim Brister

Tim has a missionary heart for his hometown to love those close to him yet far from God. He is husband to Dusti and father to Nolan, Aiden, and Adelyn - fellow pilgrims to our celestial city.

For those of us in the SBC, LifeWay Sunday School curriculum is the standard literature for small group Bible study. This morning our Sunday School class, along with untold thousands of other SBC classes, began a study in the book of Matthew based on the LifeWay curriculum. However, much to the chagrin of my SS teacher (who is also an OT prof at an SBC seminary), the curriculum began with Matthew 1:18, not Matthew 1:1.

Skipping the genealogy of Jesus of Nazareth is no small thing to be sure, especially for those of who to the conviction that all of the Bible is inspired by God and is meant to be taught and understood in the Christian community. In fact, these seventeen verses speak much to the theology of Matthew, and to overlook the first words of the New Testament is tragic to say the least (as one author puts it, “The New Testament proclaims its indebtedness to the Old Testament on the very first page . . . and signals at the start an engagement with the Old Testament that touches every page and makes great demand on its readers”). Scot McKnight writes,

“The hope of the restoration of Israel, of vindication of Israel, and of salvation for Israel were all intertwined in second temple Judaism and of this hope grew Matthew’s conviction that the story of Israel acquired its conclusive chapter in the birth, life, death, and resurrection of Jesus, son of Mary and Joseph. Such is the implication of Matthew’s genealogy” (“Theology of Matthew” in Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology. ed. Walter A. Elwell. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1996, 514).

Matthew’s introduction beginning with the genealogy of Jesus is no mere accident nor was it simply to be meaningless anecdotal information to be glossed over. The story of Jesus is inextricably linked to the story of Israel. As Christopher Wright explains, Matthew is telling his readers that “you won’t understand that story–the one I am about to tell you–unless you see it in the light of a much longer story which goes back for many centuries but leads up to the Jesus you want to know about” (Knowing Jesus Through the Old Testament, Downer’s Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1992, 1). This is the story of redemptive history in which Jesus is the theme, the climax, and the goal. If we are ever going to appreciate the significance of the person and work of Jesus Christ, we must first be tuned into the biblical narrative provided in summary form through His genealogy.

Much more could be said about these seventeen verses, about God’s providence over history, his faithfulness to his promises, the historicity of Jesus as Palestinian Jew and expected one who would rule forever as Davidic King, and the inclusion of Gentiles in grace as portrayed through the women included in the genealogy. But suffice it to say, Southern Baptists missed out on the first word of the New Testament–a word of grace, fulfillment, sovereignty, and faithfulness–all presumably because it was not relevant or applicable to the 21st century Christian. I hope that this morning there were many questions asked during Sunday School, questions such as “Why are we skipping the first seventeen verses of the New Testament?”

That’s a question I would like to have answered too.

For more on the genealogy of Jesus in Matthew, check out:

Knowing Jesus Through the Old Testament by Christopher J.H. Wright
John MacArthur’s sermon, “The Gracious King
Dr. Al Mohler’s teaching on Matthew 1:1-17 (MP3)
The Geneology of Jesus Christ Outline (CCEL)

17 thoughts on “The First Word of the New Testament Matters”

  1. I can’t answer your question why these verses were skipped other than at first glance it looks rather boring. But the genealogy which opens this Gospel and the New Testament is in many respescts the most important document in the Scriptures. The entire Bible rests upon its accuracy!

  2. Great point Timmy. I have often asked myself this question in the context of other passages as we use the Explore the Bible curriculum. I hope many teachers realized the importance of the geneology and did not skip it.

  3. Maybe they ignored the first 17 verses because it’s irrelevant? Since Jesus was born from a virgin. So what does Joseph have to do with Jesus again? Nothing it’s irrelevant. Also the fact remains there’s two different genealogies. Other one at Luke 3:21-31

    Matthew 1:18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.

    Also Jesus had a brother James…

    Keep it unreal…

  4. Linked over from Tim Challies blog, and I’m glad I did. I used to have the attitude of “why is this here?” towards the genealogy, and it’s so nice to read such a clear and solid explanation of why it’s important.

  5. I teach the “Bible Studies for Life” series from Lifeway and end up puzzled quite often to the verses left out in that series as well.

    I have found the “Sunday School Helps” for the Lifeway curriculum available from the Founders Ministry website to be a big help for pointing out additional information to consider including in the lesson. I just checked their file for the lesson you referred to from the Explore the Bible series and they did indeed touch on the genealogy section and provided references for additional information.

    P.S. Congrats on being King for a week–your site is well deserving of such honor.

  6. Tim,

    For identification purposes, we met this morning in 3-year old’s.

    I could not agree more with what you have here said, for I too would have been frustrated with any cirriculum that endeavored to teach Matthew without his own introduction.

    I preached Matthew’s geneaology several weeks ago, and have spent much time meditating on it, both for this purpose and general interest. My firm conviction concerning the value of this text only grows with time spent in it. It is, in my estimation, a masterful way to begin a masterful Gospel, providing an excellent introduction both to Matthew’s Gospel in particular and the New Testament generally.

    As those who place little esteem on the past in general and often feel a strong disjunction between oursleves and those from whom we have come, it is contrary to our modern sensibilities to appreciate a genealogy. This coupled with the typical reader’s tendency to skip any word or name not immediately understandable is certainly to blame for the prevailing attitude about this genealogy, an attitude clearly demonstrated in Lifeway’s decision to omit this portion of Matthew.

    Upon further reflection, however, after having tried to see the genealogy in light of Jewish sensibilities, it appears overwhelmingly clear that these 17 verses were, in fact, a perfect way to begin the New Testament.

    As one with a zest for bibliography, perhaps you would like to know that Understanding Matthew by Stephen Westerholm and Studies in Matthew by Dale Allison have been helpful, at least on this particular issue.

    Have a pleasant week.

    Stefan McBride

  7. So I guess no one understands my logic. What’s the point of this genealogy or the other one I pointed if Jesus was brought into the world through a VIRGIN? Also Matthew didn’t write Matthew btw. It was written by someone else a couple of decades later…

    Come on could someone please address this issue?

  8. Reminiscence,

    Thank you for commenting on my blog. Through a brief perusal of your website, I can understand why you would consider Joseph irrelevant to Jesus and that Matthew did not write Matthew. That is a consistent assertion for someone who is an atheist.

    Everyone here comes to the discussion with control beliefs or apriori convictions. Christians not only believe in God, but we also believe that the Bible is inspired by God through human authors. Joseph is incredibly significant because he showed himself a gracious and compassionate man, having found his soon-to-be wife pregnant. He could have made a public spectacle out of her, accusing her of being unfaithful to him, but he didn’t. Rather, he listened to the voice of the angel and did as he was told. Sure, he was not “in the loop” so to speak because he did not impregnate Mary, but his role is significant nonetheless. His example of obedience in faith, courage in the midst of public scrutiny, and compassion/grace towards his wife should lead us to praise God for such a man.

    Having attempted to answer your questions, I hope that you have here to better understand why we believe what we believe. It is my hope that perhaps through your visit of this blog you would encounter sinners who love Jesus and desire to share him with others (including you). At the top right side of my blog is the number “2”. If you have time, please consider checking out that presentation as it explains who Jesus is and why He came.

    Thanks again for visiting.

  9. Reminiscence,

    I just read your recent comment which happened to find its way into the moderation pool. Your comment is simply way over the top, and I cannot allow that level of rhetoric and vitriol on my blog. Being a strong atheist does not excuse you from being inaccurate. Perhaps you would like to consider “hijacking” someone else’s blog. Thanks again for visiting.

  10. Stefan,

    I enjoyed our conversation and fellowship with 3 yr. olds yesterday. It’s been a long time since I busted the move on “This Little Light of Mine.” 😉

    Your comment is spot on my friend, and thank you for the reading recommendations!

  11. Each Gospel was written to a specific target audience. Matthew wrote to the Jews, with the purpose of presenting Christ as King and Messiah. As every Jew well knows, proof of one’s tribal identity, or qualifications for the priesthood, or qualifications for land inheritance, and much more—all are bound up in that all-important entity called the *genealogy.* Matthew, himself a Jew, knew this of course, so in his treatise setting out to prove Christ as the King and Messiah, he laid as his foundation the genealogy of Christ. To purport to study the Gospel of Matthew without this foundation is to reveal a serious misunderstanding of the purpose of the book.

    Furthermore, this genealogy is a wonderful survey of the Old Testament–Starting with Abraham, the Father of the Jewish people, moving through the Pentateuch, then the conquest of the Land, the period of the Judges, the major Kings and the United Kingdom, then the Divided Kingdom with its good and bad kings, then the Babylonian captivity, the return to the Land, and the 400 silent years. What Sunday School class could not benefit from such an overview?

    Lastly, “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works” (II Timothy 3:16-17). ALL Scripture. Every verse, every word, every name in every genealogy. They’re all there for a reason, and we ignore them to our detriment.

    I hope that the Sunday School curriculum planners will modify their curriculum and include this *foundation* of the Gospel of Matthew.

    Carol Blair
    Longview, TX

  12. Carol,

    Very well stated.

    The first word of the NT brings to bear every word of the OT and brings us to an understanding of who Jesus is in historical context. I fear that so often Jesus is abstracted and then selectively studied. I would add that not only is the genealogy foundation to the gospel of Matthew, it is foundational to our understanding of who Jesus is.

  13. I taught from this on Sunday myself — I made the same point — don’t skip the great things written in Scripture. Lifeway has done a good job at making certain parts of scripture see irrelevant or less glorious than others. I wish they would slow down the studies and drink from the entire well of scripture instead of bits and pieces, here and there.

  14. I realize this is late, but here’s the quick primer on the reason Matthew includes this genealogy.

    First, the genealogy is recapping the history of Israel through her kings. Jesus is depicted, in Matthew, as the true Israel. Matthew is recapping her history.

    Second, genealogies also stand in the OT has summaries of redemptive history that are listed before a new epoch begins. Matthew is saying, “A new epoch in the covenant community has begun.” He says this to a people who believed the glory had departed from the Temple.

    Third, Matthew was writing to a Jewish audience. A very genealogically conscious audience.

    They could read 1 Kings just as well as our atheist. Indeed, they could read it in the original. They knew their way around the OT genealogies. This was, after all, a tribal society and covenant community based on God’s covenant to Abraham and his seed, as well as a dynastic priesthood. They hated Herod because Herod was a usurper—an Idumean, which made him an Edomite, which made him kin to Esau, the outcast. They were looking forward to a restoration of the Davidic kingship.

    Matthew is establishing the fact that Jesus is that king.

    Fourth, he is king by “adoption” of the rightful heir, Joseph, which prefigures the Church, who are “kings and priests” by adoption.

    Fifth, Matthew is making use of a literary convention known as gematria. The numerological arrangement of genealogies goes all the way back to Genesis, where you have ten generations from Adam to Noah (Gen 5), and ten generations from Shem to Abraham (Gen 11), as well as ten generations from Perez to David (Ruth 4:18-22; 1 Chron 2:5,9-15). For a numerological arrangement based on multiples of seven, cf. Gen 46:8-27.

    The obvious way to achieve numerical symmetry is to skip over various descendents. Indeed, if you think about it, gaps are the rule rather than the exception.

    The stereotypical formula is: A begat B, B begat C, C begat D, and so on. Notice the singular form. But most fathers in fact had more than one son.

    In Scripture, there’s a principle of theological legitimacy as well as genetic legitimacy. An apostate son is not a legitimate heir. His name and progeny may disappear from the family tree (e.g. Dan; Cain). The firstborn may be mentioned, but sometimes Scripture overrides primogeniture in favor of a younger son.

    And Jesus is thusly depicted as, unlike some in the list who had to be included and yet fell into sin, the sinless King who never apostatized and never sinned.

    Sixth, Driving the numerology is an overruling concern with tracing out the lineage of the seed of promise. Cf. “Seed,” New Dictionary of Biblical Theology, T. Alexander & B. Rosner, eds. (IVP 2000), 769-774. Matthew is signaling the fulfillment of that promise.

    So the messianic motif is driving the numerology. As such, Matthew’s practice is sanctioned by venerable Biblical precedent.

    That, to answer “Renaissance’s” question is why Matthew includes the genealogy.

    It is disappointing the Sunday literature omitted this discussion, for this would be a prime place to teach the people about these issues and to equip them to deal with people like Renaissance. It also sets the stage for the whole of Matthew, for these basic themes will repeat themselves in Matthew’s Gospel.

  15. Gene,

    Thanks for the comprehensive commentary (as usual). You brought up some very important points that had not been mentioned (such as gematria). Thanks for taking the time to do this brother!

Comments are closed.