THE first verse of this chapter gives the title to the section under consideration; while the last verse of that section summarizes its content. The first is undoubtedly the title of the genealogy of Jesus as it appeared in the Jewish records. The last is Matthew's summary of the content thereof.

It is not my purpose to dwell at any length upon the matter of the difference between this genealogy and that which we have in the gospel according to Luke. There are, however, one or two matters that it may be well for us to note by way of introduction.

The first is that to which I have already twice drawn attention. The opening words, "The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham," do not constitute the title to the gospel according to Matthew, but the title of the genealogy of Jesus Christ as it is here given. We shall take it for granted that this genealogy was taken from the legal records by Matthew in order to preface the gospel in which he was about to present the One Whom he had come to know as the long-looked-for Messiah-King of his people.

My personal conviction is that this genealogy does not appear in our gospel exactly as Matthew found it in the records. His concluding summary, in which he declares that these generations from Abraham to the Messiah fall into three cycles of fourteen, makes this improbable for the simple reason that there are conspicuous omissions. In the eighth verse between Joram and Uzziah the names of Ahaziah, Joash, and Amaziah are omitted, and in verse eleven Jehoiakim is omitted between Josiah and Jehoniah. I am inclined to believe that the former omissions were deliberately made for spiritual reasons.

It is noticeable that the evangelist says, "All the generations from Abraham unto David are fourteen generations," and in that section there are no omissions. But with regard to the subsequent divisions he says, "from David unto the carrying away to Babylon fourteen generations; and from the carrying away to Babylon unto the Christ fourteen generations;" not that they are all, but that he has named those chosen to complete the chain. When it is remembered that those omitted first were the immediate descendants of the daughter of Ahab and Jezebel, we may have a clue to the principle of Matthew's selection. In all likelihood the omission of Jehoiakim was due to the work of a copyist, because that omission makes it necessary, in order to the three fourteens, to use the name Jechoniah at the end of the second and at the beginning of the third.

It should finally be noticed that this genealogy does not say that Jesus was the son of Joseph. It is the genealogy of Jesus only because of His mother's marriage with Joseph, and in the Jewish records He appears as one born to Mary whose husband was Joseph.

I propose to glance briefly at the genealogy itself as given in the paragraph commencing with the second verse and ending with the sixteenth verse; and then to examine more carefully the title as given in the first verse, and the summary as given in the seventeenth verse.

These intervening verses are interesting for several reasons. The first is that while they are entirely Jewish in outlook, they do nevertheless overleap the boundary of the Hebrew nation in a most remarkable way in the inclusion of Rahab; and they violate the prejudice of Judaism in the introduction of women. This violation is the more remarkable when we remember the character of the women whose names are introduced. The first is that of Tamar, a notorious sinner. The second is that of Rahab, a foreigner and a sinner. The third is that of Ruth, a foreigner, although received into the nation. The fourth is that of Bathsheba, through whose sin with David the shadow of shame for ever rests upon the royal line. The fifth is that of Mary the mother of the Lord. Thus in this genealogy, consciously or unconsciously, there are signs and portents of the grace which is being brought to all men through the coming King.

Another point of interest is that of the closing declaration of the genealogy proper; "Jacob begat Joseph, the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus," which is entirely out of harmony with the method of obtaining all through until that point. It marks a separation to be explained by the story of the birth of Jesus which immediately follows. It emphasises the fact that He was not the son of Joseph. Thus on the first page of the gospel Jesus is presented as connected with a race which nevertheless could not produce Him. He came into it, was of it; and yet was distinct from it. As we have said, the mystery is not explained here, but waits for the unveiling of the subsequent story.

Turning to the examination of the first verse, which constitutes the title of the genealogy, we are at once arrested by the fact that it emphasises a relation between Jesus Christ and the two outstanding men in Hebrew history, namely Abraham and David. In each case the relationship is distinctly affirmed to be that of sonship. He is the son of David, and the son of Abraham. Thus His connection with the Hebrew people is royal and racial. He is of the kingly line, and He is from the father and founder of the people. It may be as well at this point to draw attention to the fact that the genealogy given in Matthew corresponds exactly with that given in Luke between Abraham and David. The differences are found in the portion of the genealogy from David to Jesus. The genealogy in Luke gives His lineal descent through Mary, and He was through her, son of David. Matthew therefore speaks of Him as son of David, and not as son of any of those who are in the genealogy of Joseph subsequent to that point.

The remarkable fact of this title is that it speaks of Jesus as son of David and son of Abraham. Now the peculiar promise of God to each of these men, according to Old Testament history, was that of a son; and the immediate fulfilment in each case was in many senses disappointing. Therefore the son of Abraham, who came for the fulfilment of the ideals for which he stood in obedience to faith; and the son of David, who came for the fulfilment of the ideals for which he stood in obedience to faith; was neither Isaac, nor Solomon, but Jesus.

This fact is worthy of a somewhat closer examination in each case. Let us take them in the order of statement in the verse.

The son of David to whom he looked for the fulfilment of his purpose of the establishment of the kingdom around the temple of Jehovah was Solomon. His name, Solomon, the peaceful, suggested the principle of the kingdom. His greatest endowment was that of wisdom. His specific work was that of the building of the temple. His reign was characterized by peace and prosperity.

Nevertheless the story of Solomon is one of disastrous failure. In spite of the gifts of wisdom from on high he lived a life of unutterable and appalling folly. Even though he built the temple, he so contradicted all that for which it stood as to make it a centre of form without power; and even though, through the goodness of God to him, for the sake of his father, the kingdom was maintained in peace and prosperity during the period of his life, he had sown it with seeds of disruption which bore harvest immediately after his death. Thus was David disappointed in his son after the flesh.

Jesus Christ, the Son of David after the flesh, but the Son of God as the resurrection finally attested, came for the overcoming of all the failure which characterized the life and reign of Solomon. With an infinite wisdom He proceeded to the building of the temple which cannot be destroyed; and laid the foundation for the establishment of the Kingdom in peace and prosperity from which all that offends will finally be cast forth.

The son of Abraham to whom he looked for the fulfilment of the promise of God, that from him there should spring a nation which should be the medium of blessing to all the nations, was Isaac. His name, Isaac, laughter, was to Abraham for evermore a witness of the merging of the human and the Divine, in that he was born because "Sarah received power to conceive seed when she was past age." Through him there was given to Abraham that seed which consisted of sons who, to his vision, were destined to carry forward the enterprises of God. The one influence which he exerted was that of the power, which he retained by faith, of blessing his sons after him.

Nevertheless the story of Isaac is one of disappointment, both in the weakness of his own character, and in the appalling failure of his sons through the long succession of the ages; and in the fact that they failed to enter into the true meaning and value of the blessing he pronounced. Thus was Abraham disappointed in his son after the flesh.

Jesus, the son of Abraham after the flesh, but in the mystery of His Person able to say, "Before Abraham was I am," came to realize and fulfill all the purpose which had failed through Isaac and his seed after him. He was the true son of Abraham both human and Divine, and there sprang from Him "so many as the stars of heaven in multitude, and as the sand, which is by the seashore, innumerable," to carry out the purposes of God.

Thus Jesus Christ, the Son of David and Son of Abraham, came in the fullness of the times to overcome the failure of Solomon the son of David and Isaac the son of Abraham; and to establish the throne and to perfect the nation.

In the summary with which the section ends three crises in the history of the people are mentioned. The first is that original movement connected with the call of Abraham; his obedience and consequent founding of the new race on the principle of faith. The second is connected with David, the king after God's own heart; whose appointment was nevertheless the outcome of national failure in that they clamoured for " a king like unto the nations," The last is that of the carrying away into captivity to Babylon of the people whose very existence in the economy of God was intended to be a force antagonistic to everything of which Babylon was the embodiment.

The three cycles culminate in Christ, and that fact suggests His relation to all. As we think of them and of Him, we are impressed by the threefold fact of relationship in each case which may be described as identity of principle, superiority of realization, and correction of failure.

The relationship between Abraham and Christ is first that of identity of principle. The principle on which Abraham acted when he left Ur of the Chaldees, and throughout the whole of his life, in so far as it was in accord with the Divine will, was that of faith. The whole life and ministry of Jesus, on the plane of His humanity, was true to the selfsame principle; and as it has often been pointed out, the writer of the letter to the Hebrews gives Him precedence of Abraham in this matter, as he declares Him to be the Author, or File-leader of faith.

The difference is at once seen in the absolute superiority of His realization of this principle of faith. In the life of Abraham we have accounts of deflections issuing in disgrace, and almost in disaster. In the life of Jesus there was no doubt, and consequently no deviation from the path of obedience.

Moreover, and principally, the relation between Christ and Abraham is that of His correction of the failure. In His case the city of God is not only looked for, but built; the glory of God is not only sought, but manifested.

The relationship between David and Christ is first that of identity of principle in the matter of kingship. David's loyalty to Jehovah was the condition of his royalty. It was because of his fidelity to Him in circumstances of difficulty that he came at last to full and glorious crowning. In the case of Jesus all that was imperfectly foreshadowed in the experience of David was absolutely fulfilled. Loyalty to the will of God was the master passion of His life, and created the majesty and might of His regal authority.

The superiority of realization is even more marked in this case than in the former. David's deflections from loyalty not only tarnished the escutcheon of his royalty, but limited the extent of his authority. The absolute abandonment of Jesus to the acceptable will of His Father created the lustre of His crown, and ensured that limitlessness of empire which enabled Him to say, "All authority hath been given unto Me in heaven and on earth."

The final and gracious fact of relationship between Christ and David is that of His assured establishment of the Kingdom, and the vindication of the glory of God.

The relationship between the carrying away into captivity and Christ is again that of identity of principle. These people passed under the yoke of a nation full of pride and rebellious against God's government. Christ was born under the yoke of Rome, amid His people, in days when their independence was lost. The very surroundings of His birth were created by the fact that His mother with Joseph her husband were travelling in obedience to the edict of the Emperor that all the world should be enrolled.

His infinite superiority is seen in the quiet dignity of His submission through all the days of His earthly life, as He rendered to Caesar the things that belonged to Caesar; and in that fine triumph over the outward yoke of Caesar, as He rendered to God the things that belong unto God.

The final fact of relationship between Christ and the captivity is that of His breaking of all the bonds resulting from sin, and leading the exodus of all such as trust Him.

Thus in this genealogical paragraph humanity's aspirations and incompetencies are represented in these generations; and aspirations and incompetencies alike look wistfully to Him. The founder and the king look to Him as Son for the fulfilment of purpose. Faith, which by comparison with sight has seemed feeble through the passing of the centuries, waits His vindication. Government which has perpetually failed waits His administration. Captivity which has sighed and sobbed in its agony waits His emancipation. What can He do? We will pursue the story presently, and in the meantime crown Him in hope;

WE have considered the genealogy of Jesus as recorded in the first seventeen verses. Now we commence the study of the story of His birth.

Dr. Horton once ended a singularly beautiful sermon on the Virgin Birth o Jesus in words which are well worth reading as a preliminary to this study. After treating the story as constituting one of the idylls of the infancy and life-dealing with it in a most reverent way, as being one of those sweet and sacred things that never could have been known unless told by Joseph, or Mary, or both-he said, "I believe, my dear friends, that you can do a great service' to-day; you can relieve the minds and consciences of thousands of people if you can simply pass on the thought: I believe in the Divinity of Jesus Christ my Lord, on the grounds that St. Paul and St. John have given; and then, I believe in the stories of the infancy because I believe in the Divinity of the Lord, and I have found in them a beautiful illustration of what Christ meant when He said, 'I am from above ; I am not of this world.' "

That position one is fully prepared to accept. Our belief in the truth of this sacred story is based upon the facts of the Person and purposes of Jesus as unfolded in the writings of the Apostles, which writings are in turn demonstrated true in our own personal experience.

The very position indicated makes it impossible to agree with Dr. Horton in a statement immediately preceding this. Speaking of the Virgin Birth of Jesus, he said, "Never give anyone the impression that the faith of Jesus depends upon it, or that a man cannot believe in our Lord because he does not believe in the idylls of the infancy."

While recognizing the spirit of patience and toleration which such a statement breathes, it is impossible to accept it as logical. If belief in the teaching of Paul and John necessarily leads to belief in the truth of this story of Matthew, lien it necessarily follows that to reject this story of Matthew is finally to reject the teaching of Paul and John, and so not to believe in the Deity of the Lord Jesus Christ.

All our future studies will be from the standpoint of belief in the Deity of Jesus as taught in the subsequent writings of the New Testament, and therefore as accepting this story, as presenting in idyllic form, the sublime, mysterious, and infinite truth-"that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit."

From this whole idyll we select the words which chronicle two prophecies. The angelic prophecy is in the words-

The angel's quotation is from the prophecy of Isaiah, and follows immediately.

Eliminating the words which speak of the method of His coming words which are so severely plain as to demand simple acceptance or equally simple rejection* because we accept them, for the reasons already stated, we shall take the two prophetic words concerning Him-

and,

The second is a prophecy of the past, expressing the hope of the people. The past looked on, and looked up, and looked out, and sighed for "Immanuel - God with us." The first is the prophecy which tells us how that hope has been realized. The angel declares that all that longing is to be answered, for Jesus is to be born, Who is to save His people from their sins. Observe carefully the angelic message. He is to fulfill the prophecy of the past, "Immanuel - God with us."

While in the text the prophecies are placed in the order, first of realization, and then of the statement of the hope, in this study we will take them in the other order, which is that of their real occurrence in the Divine Library.

We will consider, then, first, the hope-"They shall call His name Immanuel, which is, being interpreted, God with us;" and secondly, the realization-"Thou shalt call His name Jesus, for it is He that shall save His people from their sins."

I. This old-time prophecy quoted by the angel, is from the seventh chapter of the prophecy of Isaiah. Look very carefully at its setting therein. It reads thus: " Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign; behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call His name Immanuel. Butter and honey shall He eat, when He knoweth to refuse the evil, and choose the good. For before the Child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land whose two kings thou abhorrest shall be forsaken." (Ch. vii. 14-16) [Isa 7:14-16].

To take the quotation in this way is at once to be brought into the presence of something that increasingly seems to have, as the history is examined, no connection with this great subject of the Birth of Jesus. If the whole chapter be read, it will be found that the prophet Isaiah was talking to king Ahaz who was in peril, because Rezin, king of Syria, and Pekah, king of Israel, were coming up against Jerusalem. The prophet told Ahaz to be quiet; that there need be no panic in his heart.

Comparing the prophecy of Isaiah with the historical books, we discover that Ahaz was bent upon seeking aid from some other power. The prophet appealed to him to do nothing of the kind, and said. "Ask thee a sign of Jehovah thy God; ask it either in the depth, or in the height above." Ahaz replied that he would not ask a sign of God. Then said the prophet, "Therefore the Lord Himself will give thee a sign; behold the virgin shall conceive."

" For before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land whose two kings thou abhorrest shall be forsaken." He then proceeded to say that not only should the enemies be defeated, but that his own nation should be broken because of their lack of faith.

That prophecy was perhaps partially fulfilled in the birth of a child to Isaiah. In the story in the following chapter there was a child born who was named Maher-shalal-hash-baz, the meaning of which is, the spoil speedeth, the prey hasteth. For all local fulfilment this was the child referred to. The phrase, "Immanuel, God with us," had never occurred before. It occurs twice in Isaiah once here, and once in the following chapter-and never again until the angel whispered it to Joseph, as chronicled in the story in Matthew. We can hardly understand the value of this in a study of the mere text. The whole context must be taken. For an interpretation of this prophecy chapters six to nine should be studied. The reference to Immanuel in chapter seven is incidental-not accidental-but preparatory, a gleam of light flashing on a purely local circumstance.

Let us epitomize chapters six to nine in order to see the setting.

In chapter six the death of Uzziah is recorded, also the story of that marvellous vision, as a result of which Isaiah was anointed and consecrated for his work.

Then, immediately we pass into changed circumstances. Ahaz was on the throne; The two kings Rezin and Pekah had come up against Jerusalem, and Ahaz wanted to call in aid from without. The prophet besought him not to do this, but to trust in God; and told him that a son should be given.

Notice what is here stated concerning Immanuel, for the prophecy merges into something larger than the local setting, as prophecies always do.

It is impossible to study the prophecies of the Old Testament without discovering that the prophets looked down the vista of years, and sometimes described something quite close at hand; then saw how its lines ran out into the coming ages; and omitting intervening ages, described the final issue. So here Isaiah's prophecy merges into something larger. He said that when Immanuel came He should eat "curds and honey," which signifies that He would come into the midst of circumstances of poverty and trouble.

Turn to chapter eight. A son was born to Isaiah, and the prophet announced the coming of Assyria in verse eight - "It shall sweep onward into Judah; it shall overflow and pass through; it shall reach even to the neck; and the stretching out of its wings shall fill the breadth of thy land, O Immanuel."

There was a person in the mind of the prophet, not yet focussed or revealed, as he spoke of the Virgin's Child, Immanuel. As he saw desolation coming to the land of the ancient people he spoke of it as the land of Immanuel. He evidently contemplated the incoming foes and spoke of them, and said, "Make an uproar, O ye peoples, and be broken in pieces. . . . Take counsel together, and it shall be brought to nought; speak the word, and it shall not stand; for Immanuel, God is with us."

The name is mentioned in the local prophecy, but thus it merges into a larger application when the prophet speaks of the land as "Immanuel's land." It includes a still larger outlook when the prophet declares that the foes coming against the land will be defeated because Immanuel will be with Israel.

The Messianic quality gradually grows as we read through the prophecy. Who is Immanuel? What is He to be? He is to be a sanctuary, and a rock of offence.

The Person Immanuel, incidentally mentioned in local connection, in chapter seven, blazes out into splendid light in the ninth chapter as the prophet wrote, "For unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given; and the government shall be upon His shoulder: and His name shall be called Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. Of the increase of His government and of peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon His kingdom, to establish it."

Long centuries passed, and an angel came in a dream to a man and told him that the ultimate fulfilment of that prophecy was at hand. While the words of Isaiah had local applications, they had vaster values than such applications could contain. So the birth of Jesus was for the fulfilment of those vaster values that lay within the old-time prophecy. This hope must be interpreted in its local setting, and yet with that more spacious intention which it evidently contains.

From this examination of Isaiah's prophecy we make general deductions. Take the first and the last of these verses. The first (ch. vii. 14) [Isa 7:14] - "A Virgin shall conceive, and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel;" the last (ch. ix. 6) [Isa 6:6] - "Unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given." This one great prophecy beginning in such a simple circumstance and growing to such a sublime declaration, expressed the hope that God would presence Himself in actual human life through a human birth; that by some mysterious method which could not be expressed fully in human language, God would come and manifest Himself in a four-fold character.

The Bible may be divided around that description of manifestation. "Wonderful Counsellor;" so man first knew Him. "Mighty God;" so was He revealed through all the processes of the history of the Hebrew nation. "Everlasting Father;" so is He known in this dispensation. "Prince of Peace;" so shall He be revealed in the established Kingdom. All that was focussed in this Child.

Thus the immediate teaching of Isaiah's prophecy flashed its light forward. Immanuel shall come into the midst of His people's degradation and share it. Immanuel shall become a sanctuary and a stone of stumbling. Immanuel shall finally conquer all His enemies. At last the God-inspired hope of His people, expressed through prophecy, is declared to be realized in the birth of the Child of Mary. Joseph heard it and believed it. Mary heard it and sang the Magnificat. Early disciples heard it, and hearing it believed it, and proclaimed it. It is far easier for us to believe it than it was for any of these to do so, because we see the programme carried out into the centuries. As we read carefully and ponder it, we discover the whole programme of events, from the time Isaiah spoke until now, and beyond it, gathered round the word Immanuel. It was a great hope, and all that we see fulfilling the prophecy, is the result of His birth.

II. Now let us go back to the first prophecy, made directly by the angel to the man Joseph -"She shall bring forth a Son; and thou shalt call His name JESUS; for it is He that shall save His people from their sins."

Take the local setting. This story is beautiful in its simplicity. Joseph was a just man, "a righteous man." One hardly knows which word is best to use. We talk to-day of a just man; and we may think of a man hard and cold. We talk of a righteous man, and we have said, "Scarcely for a righteous man will one die; for peradventure for the good man some one would even dare to die." The good man is the man of the simple heart. A blunt translation would be Joseph was a straight man, a true man. Not that he was severe and harshly just; not coldly and cynically righteous; but he was a true man, the carpenter, the village builder.

Mary was his betrothed, and according to the old and beautiful Hebrew custom was bound to Joseph, the betrothal ceremony being as sacred as the marriage rite, after which the bridegroom took his bride home, with songs and rejoicing, and accompaniment of music. They were simple village folk of royal lineage, for when the angel spoke to Joseph he did not call Jesus his son, but Son of David. A straight strong man, and a simple, sweet maid.

There is no love story quite as sweet as the love story of mountain, hill and village. All the conventional arrangements of marriages are of hell. Love that is a dream, breaking in upon the soul, is always beautiful.

In the midst of that period of betrothal came that awe-inspiring and Holy Mystery, that sacred Mystery that we meditate in solemn silence; the Holy Mystery - the touch of God upon the simple life that made it for ever sublime. A thing not to be repeated; unique, and alone in the history of the race. The word of God is not void but powerful; and the maiden was possessed with the Holy Mystery.

Then the angel visitor came, and announced the name, "Thou shalt call His name Jesus." It was just an ordinary Jewish name about as common in Judaea as John is common amongst us. The name had not the significance that we understand to-day. Thank God it has gathered so much beauty and fragrance about it, that we can never dare call our children by that Name, and we are right. It was a beautiful, Jewish boy's name, a common name of the common people. But here, as everywhere in the great spiritual movement, God took hold of the commonplace to show that there was something infinitely more than the common. Jesus is a Greek form of the Hebrew Joshua, meaning Saviour. Other men had borne that name. Many a mother called her boy Joshua, in the hope that he would be a saviour, and break oppression, and set the people free. Now the angel said: Give that name to this Boy; "It is He that shall save His people from their sins." Take the human name, sweetest of them all, and give it to the Child of the Holy Mystery; the Child Who is not of Joseph, but of God, Tell His sweet mother Mary to give Him this name Jesus. Moreover, the name means "Jehovah Salvation."

Mark the intention of it. They are "His people." Give Him the name as one of His people; calling Him by the ordinary name of His people; He is coming to identification with them. They are under a yoke, eating curds and honey; He is coming to eat curds and honey with them, as the prophet said. They are an oppressed and a devastated people; He is coming to identification with them; give Him the name signifying identification in all its deepest meaning. He is coming to suffer.

Then mark how the angel told heaven's secret in heaven's language. What the people thought they wanted was a Joshua who could reveal himself to this material Jerusalem as King, break the power of Rome, and set up an earthly Kingdom. The angel said the deeper trouble was not that of the Roman yoke; or that they had been beaten in battle; the trouble with them was that they were sinners - "He shall save His people from their sins." He will not come to battle with externalities, but to grip sin at its heart.

We look on as the angel speaks, and we see the Cross, the way by which "He shall save His people from their sins." The name is a prophecy. Joseph was commanded to give it to Jesus, and when Joseph gave it to Him, it was prophecy only - "Call His name Jesus, for it is He that shall save His people from their sins."

A generation passed away, three score years, and, at the close of the period, the story was recorded by the evangelists. At last the Apostle of the Gentiles told it also. Jesus, "existing in the form of God, counted not the being on an equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a Servant, being made in the likeness of men." He did not abhor the virgin's womb, but came in "the likeness of men." That is the apostles' story of the incarnation.

Now follow the story. "Becoming obedient even unto death, yea, the death of the Cross. Wherefore also God highly exalted Him, and gave unto Him the name." What name is this? Joseph called Him Jesus because the angel said that He was to be named so. It was a prophecy; but it was fulfilled by His birth, His Cross, and His Resurrection.

God gave Him the name when He ascended. What name was it?

Never was there so much music as there is in that Name.

So came the King. Standing back to-day, and looking over the centuries, we see the merging of the Hope Immanuel, into realization in Jesus. God is born of a virgin into human life. God is born into the midst of the degradation of man. God moves in this Man to the Throne of imperial and unending Government. God through this Man saves from sins, and establishes and upholds a Kingdom for ever. God performs all this in His own zeal through Jesus Christ.