32 the `son' of David, the `son' of Jesse, the `son' of Obed, the `son' of Booz, the `son' of Salmon, the `son' of Nahshon,
And these are genealogies of Pharez: Pharez begat Hezron, and Hezron begat Ram, and Ram begat Amminidab, and Amminidab begat Nahshon, and Nahshon begat Salmon, and Salmon begat Boaz, and Boaz begat Obed, and Obed begat Jesse, and Jesse begat David.
And Ram begat Amminadab, and Amminadab begat Nahshon, prince of the sons of Judah; and Nahshon begat Salma, and Salma begat Boaz, and Boaz begat Obed, and Obed begat Jesse; and Jesse begat his first-born Eliab, and Abinadab the second, and Shimea the third, Nethaneel the fourth, Raddai the fifth, Ozem the sixth, David the seventh,
and Judah begat Pharez and Zarah of Tamar, and Pharez begat Hezron, and Hezron begat Ram, and Ram begat Amminadab, and Amminadab begat Nahshon, and Nahshon begat Salmon, and Salmon begat Boaz of Rahab, and Boaz begat Obed of Ruth, and Obed begat Jesse, and Jesse begat David the king. And David the king begat Solomon, of her `who had been' Uriah's,
And a rod hath come out from the stock of Jesse, And a branch from his roots is fruitful. Rested on him hath the Spirit of Jehovah, The spirit of wisdom and understanding, The spirit of counsel and might, The spirit of knowledge and fear of Jehovah.
and having removed him, He did raise up to them David for king, to whom also having testified, he said, I found David, the `son' of Jesse, a man according to My heart, who shall do all My will. `Of this one's seed God, according to promise, did raise to Israel a Saviour -- Jesus,
Worthy.Bible » Commentaries » Matthew Henry Commentary » Commentary on Luke 3
Commentary on Luke 3 Matthew Henry Commentary
Chapter 3
Nothing is related concerning our Lord Jesus from his twelfth year to his entrance on his thirtieth year. We often think it would have been a pleasure and advantage to us if we had journals, or at least annuls, of occurrences concerning him; but we have as much as Infinite Wisdom thought fit to communicate to us, and, if we improve not that, neither should we have improved more if we had had it. The great intention of the evangelists was to give us an account of the gospel of Christ, which we are to believe, and by which we hope for salvation: now that began in the ministry and baptism of John, and therefore they hasten to give us an account of that. We could wish, perhaps, that Luke had wholly passed by what was related by Matthew and Mark, and had written only what was new, as he has done in his two first chapters. But it was the will of the Spirit that some things should be established out of the mouth, not only of two, but of three witnesses; and we must not reckon it a needless repetition, nor shall we do so if we renew out meditations upon these things, with suitable affections. In this chapter we have,
Luk 3:1-14
John's baptism introducing a new dispensation, it was requisite that we should have a particular account of it. Glorious things were said of John, what a distinguished favourite of Heaven he should be, and what a great blessing to this earth (ch. 1:15, 17); but we lost him in the deserts, and there he remains until the day of his showing unto Israel, ch. 1:80. And now at last that day dawns, and a welcome day it was to them that waited for it more than they that waited for the morning. Observe here,
Luk 3:15-20
We are now drawing near to the appearance of our Lord Jesus publicly; the Sun will not be long after the morning-star. We are here told,
The evangelist concludes his account of John's preaching with an et caetera (v. 18): Many other things in his exhortation preached he unto the people, which are not recorded.
Luk 3:21-38
The evangelist mentioned John's imprisonment before Christ's being baptized, though it was nearly a year after it, because he would finish the story of John's ministry, and then introduce that of Christ. Now here we have,
One difficulty occurs between Abraham and Noah, which gives us some perplexity, v. 35, 36. Sala is said to be the son of Cainan, and he the son of Arphaxad, whereas Sala was the son of Arphaxad (Gen. 10:24; 11:12), and there is no such man as Cainan found there. But, as to that, it is sufficient to say that the Seventy Interpreters, who, before our Saviour's time, translated the Old Testament into Greek, for reasons best known to themselves inserted that Cainan; and St. Luke, writing among the Hellenist Jews, was obliged to make use of that translation, and therefore to take it as he found it.
The genealogy concludes with this, who was the son of Adam, the son of God.