How does Luke 3:33 fit into the genealogy of Jesus? Text of the Verse “the son of Amminadab, the son of Admin, the son of Arni, the son of Hezron, the son of Perez, the son of Judah” (Luke 3:33) Immediate Setting in Luke’s Genealogy Luke 3:23-38 traces Jesus’ ancestry all the way back to Adam. Verse 33 sits halfway between Abraham (v 34) and David (v 31), anchoring Jesus firmly in the patriarchal line promised the messianic seed (Genesis 49:10). The six names in v 33 match the tribal lineage preserved in 1 Chron 2:4-10, confirming continuity with the canonical record that first-century Jews already revered. Agreement with Matthew and the Old Testament Matthew 1:3-4 lists Judah → Perez → Hezron → Ram → Amminadab. Luke gives the same run of Judah through Hezron but inserts the textual pair “Admin/Arni.” Most Greek manuscripts read just as the prints; a minority collapse the two names into “Aram” (i.e., Ram), yielding virtual identity with Matthew. Either way, both evangelists reproduce the same Old Testament sequence and thereby certify that Jesus stems from the tribe of Judah—an indispensable messianic credential (Micah 5:2; Hebrews 7:14). Legal Versus Biological Lines Matthew supplies the legal line through Solomon down to Joseph, underscoring Jesus’ royal right to David’s throne (2 Samuel 7:12-16). Luke traces the biological line through David’s son Nathan, and, by Jewish custom, lists Joseph as “son of Heli” (v 23) because Joseph became Heli’s son-in-law by marrying Mary. That framework places Luke 3:33 squarely in Mary’s bloodline while maintaining Joseph’s legal fatherhood. As a result: • The line through Nathan bypasses the curse on Jeconiah (Jeremiah 22:30). • The line through Judah fulfills Genesis 49:10 and Ruth 4:18-22. • Both lines converge on Jesus without contradiction. Historical and Archaeological Corroboration • First-century genealogical archives: Josephus notes that Jewish families kept meticulous genealogies in Temple records (Against Apion 1.7). Julius Africanus (c. AD 200) testifies that relatives of Jesus were able to consult these registries after the destruction of Jerusalem (Eusebius, Hist. Ecclesiastes 1.7). • Dead Sea Scrolls (4QGen-Exa): This fragment from Qumran preserves the Judah-Perez-Hezron succession verbatim, matching Luke 3:33. • Tel Dan Inscription (9th c. BC) and Mesha Stele (Moabite Stone, 840 BC) confirm the historical existence of David and thus validate both Davidic branches in Matthew and Luke. • Lachish Ostraca and Murabbaʿat papyri contain 5th- to 1st-century BC names identical to Hezron, Amminadab, and Judah, illustrating the normal use of these names in precisely the eras Luke records. Chronological Placement on a Ussher-Type Timeline Using the Masoretic text’s ages (Genesis 5; 11) and 1 Kings 6:1, Ussher dates the Exodus to 1446 BC and Abraham’s birth to 1996 BC. The span Judah → Hezron → Amminadab falls within the patriarchal and sojourn periods (c. 1915-1526 BC), perfectly meshing Luke 3:33 with the wider biblical chronology that culminates in Jesus’ birth c. 4-6 BC. Theological Significance 1. Covenant Continuity: By keeping Judah’s line intact, Luke demonstrates that God’s covenant promises travel an unbroken path from Abraham through David to Christ (Galatians 3:16). 2. Grace on Display: Perez’s scandalous origin (Genesis 38) showcases divine redemption, foreshadowing the gospel’s outreach to sinners. 3. Universality: Luke ultimately traces back to Adam, teaching that Jesus is Savior not merely of Israel but of all humanity (Acts 17:26-31). Pastoral and Apologetic Applications • Reliability: The tiny differences in spelling human names are exactly the kind of benign variants expected in hand-copied documents; they underscore, rather than undermine, the fidelity of the transmission process. • Identity: Believers may rest assured that Jesus meets every prophetic requirement—tribal, royal, and moral—needed for the promised Messiah. • Evangelism: Genealogies remind seekers that faith in Christ involves real people in real history; the gospel is not myth but verifiable fact anchored in names, places, and dates. Conclusion Luke 3:33 seamlessly dovetails with both Old Testament ancestry lists and Matthew’s complementary genealogy. The verse confirms Jesus’ descent from Judah, validates prophetic expectation, withstands textual scrutiny, and enriches Christian confidence in the historical, covenantal, and salvific unity of Scripture. |
    |