Matthew 1

Matthew 1:1-25

THE OF JESUS Matthew, Chapter 1. Sermon by Dr. W. B. Riley, First Baptist Church, September 13, 1925. IN taking up the New Testament, there are two possible places of beginning. One might combine the introductory words of Luk 1:1-4 : “Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us, “Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word; “It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus, “That thou mightest know the certainty of those things, wherein thou hast been instructed.” with John 1:1-14 : “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. “The same was in the beginning with God. “All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. “In him was life; and the life was the light of men. “And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not. “There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. “The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe. “He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light. “That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world. “He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not. “He came unto his own, and his own received him not. “But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: “Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.” for in the two passages, he would have presented Luke’s reason for giving his Gospel and John’s spiritual, and, in the last analysis, true definition of the Son of God. However, the primary place in the New Testament accorded to Matthew, gives an equal occasion for commencing the studies with its opening verse. “The Book of the Generation of Jesus Christ, the Son of David, the Son of Abraham”. This verse is significant in the last degree, since it suggests not only the genealogy of Jesus, the famous Bethlehem babe, “the seed of woman who should bruise the serpent’s head” (Genesis 3:15), but also calls him the “Christ”, the Lord’s anointed (Psalms 2:2); the Son of David, the heir to the throne by promise (Jeremiah 23:5); the Son of Abraham, the consummation of the covenant (Genesis 12:1-3). It falls out, therefore, that when one has finished the first three lines of sacred Scripture, he has set before him a personage of supreme importance, a character of such historic connection as to require the Old Testament for its elaboration, and of such significance and promise as to demand the revelation of the New. Matthew, the writer of this Book, takes up at once the genealogy of Jesus, and in his first chapter, makes him the sublime personage towards whom all Jewish history moved since Abraham’s day. Luke 3:23-38, links this same personage to all human history from the hour when God created Adam. Before beginning the discussion, therefore, of Matthew at all, it is well to remark that the four Gospels are four separate yet essential presentations of the same colossal figure—Christ. Matthew, writing more particularly for the Jews, presents him as “Israel’s King”. Mark shows Him as the “Lord’s servant”; Luke reveals him as the “Divine Man”, and John as the “Word made Flesh”. In this exposition of Matthew, it is our plan to introduce corroborating Scripture from the synoptics of Mark and Luke. That decision brings us at once face to face with THE DOUBLE In Matthew 1:2-17, we have the genealogy of Jesus from Abraham’s time, while in Luke 3:23-38 we have His genealogy from His time back to Adam, —present humanity’s first and divinely—created man; and in the double genealogy, certain evident facts should be observed. In Matthew Christ is traced from Abraham, in Luke to Adam. Forty-two generations removed from Abraham; seventy-four generations removed from Adam, Matthew’s reason for beginning with Abraham is in the fact that he writes particularly for Jews, and Jews who are familiar with the promise made to Abraham, “In thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed”. But that was not the beginning of God’s beneficent purpose towards sinful man. No sooner had man sinned than God’s provision of grace was voiced and the promise was given that “the seed of woman should bruise the serpent’s head”. Men are wont to discuss why God created Adam and Eve with the possibility of sin, as if intelligent moral natures were conceivable apart from such a possibility. It more becomes us to dwell, not so much upon why God made the sin of humanity possible, as upon the exceeding grace’ that immediately proffered, against the sin already committed, the Saviour. The covenant which was made to Abraham was but a confirmation of the promise to Adam and all his offspring, and we note in passing that in keeping that promise, God deliberately elected Isaac, who was a gift from God, rather than Ishmael, the offspring of the flesh, and ran the line through Jacob, his elect, rather than Esau, the first-born. And yet, though that line continues through Judah, a favorite son, it cannot be forgotten that it flow through names that threaten its honor and involves forebears, of whom Jesus might justly have been ashamed. Thamar, the harlot; Rachab and Ruth, the Canaanite and Moabite, respectively, women of Gentile blood and of humble station. These are all in the line of Christ’s ancestry, and yet, neither is His nature defiled by that fact, nor is His standing depreciated. As the sweetest lily drives its roots into filth and vegetable decay, and yet extracts therefrom both matchless beauty and purity, so Christ, the descendant of Thamar, was “separate from sinners” and His greatness was in no wise taken from, by the strain of Gentile blood. On the contrary, the life that God links with harlots and sinners, gave to birth a promise of uplift, and assurance’ of salvation. There is no one so stained by sin or degraded in social standing as to be di creed forever from kinship with Him. The sinful can become “His mother”, “His father”, “His sister”, “His brother”, for He said, “Whosoever doeth the will of My Father which is in Heaven, the same is my mother and sister and brother”. These two long lists of names, most of them practically unknown to history, and still more’ of them difficult to pronounce, are not, then, a useless catalogue. They contain a Gospel instead—not a Gospel of despair, but a Gospel of hope for all mankind. There has seldom or never, since Adam’s day, been a great man in the world, but if you traced him far enough back, you would find him ignobly connected; and it is not necessary, in order to make that remark truthful, to trace him to “sloths” and “skunks”, or even “chimpanzees” or “gorillas”. God knows his human connections are bad enough; but is that his disgrace? No! It may be his honor instead. David was a grievous sinner, and Christ was sinless. Is it his responsibility? Not in the least. It was his glory. “When the son hath done that which is lawful and right and hath kept all my statutes, and hath done them, he shall surely live. The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son; the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him” (Ezekiel 18:19-20). This genealogical table shows that with God, as between Jew and Gentile, “there is no difference”. Matthew links him with the Jew. Luke links him with the Gentile as well. “In Christ, there is neither Jew nor Greek.” In Matthew, His blood-claim to David’s throne is established. In Luke, His legal-claim. It is interesting to trace these two genealogies and see them meet and cross one another in David. They had to do so, for “to David the promise was given that there should never want him a man to sit upon the throne of the House of Israel”. There are people, professors in schools of various sorts, professional agnostics of the Rationalistic type, who tell the immature youth and the uneducated adult, that there are two different and conflicting genealogies of Jesus given in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke. Such a proclamation reveals the same scant knowledge of God’s Word that characterized all that was spoken by the defenders’ of Scopes in the famous Dayton trial, and if one can suppress his contempt to the nature of pity, he should certainly feel it for such “would-be instructors”. Jesus had, as all children since Adam and Eve have had, different lines of ancestors; one on his father’s side and one on his mother’s side. God’s promises fail not, and the fulfillment of His word to David that “his seed should sit on the throne of Israel forever” comes to fullest measure in the two tables of genealogy. One of them—Matthew—showing Christ descended directly from David through Mary, giving Him the blood-right to the throne, and Luke’s Gospel, tracing Him straight back as “being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph”, the legal line of heirship. But by the marriage of Mary to Joseph, His double claim, was established; the claim of blood and the claim of legality. Without that marriage neither claim could certainly have held. For Joseph was of the seed of Coniah and God had said that “no seed of Coniah could ever prosper sitting on the throne of David”. That is why Christ had to be born of a virgin. Since Christ, not being the seed of Joseph, but virgin-born, could yet through Joseph, a descendant of David, claim the throne legally? Being the babe of Mary, He had an equal claim through His mother’s line, and it was in Him that God’s servant, David, became a “Prince’ forever”. In Matthew, Christ fulfills the prophecy of the coming King; in Luke, that of a promised Saviour. The virgin bringing forth a son was to call His name Immanuel, which, being interpreted is “God with us” OUR KING” (Matthew 1:23). But in Luke’s Gospel, by repeated statement, “Jesus, our Saviour”. What unspeakable joy to find these offices in the same man. If the condemned criminal finds in a King or President, whose word is power, a friend, he is happy indeed that those offices combine in one. The hope of the world of sinners is in a single circumstance, namely, that the compassionate Christ is also THE KING OF KINGS, whose speech is the end of all discussion, whose will knows no successful opposition, and whose compassion is exceeding great! O worship the King, all glorious above, And gratefully sing, His wonderful love; Our Shield and Defender, the Ancient of days, Pavilioned in splendor, and girded with praise.

O tell of His might, and sing of His grace, Whose robe is the light, whose canopy space; His chariots of wrath the deep thunderclouds form, And dark is His path on the wings of the storm.

Thy bountiful care what tongue can recite? It breathes in the air, it shines in the light, It streams from the hills, it descends to the plain, And sweetly distills in the dew and the rain.

Frail children of dust, and feeble as frail, In Thee do we trust, nor find Thee to fail; Thy mercies how tender! how firm to the end! Our Maker, Defender, Redeemer, and Friend. THE GREAT EVENT Henrik Van Loon, whose History of Man should be placed on the fiction shelf of libraries, says, “In the beginning, the planet upon which we live was, as far as we know, a large ball of flaming matter. After millions of years the surface burned itself out and was covered with a thin layer of rocks. Upon these lifeless rocks the rain descended in endless torrents. Finally the sun broke through the clouds; then one day the great wonder happened. What had been dead gave birth to life”. That’s the fiction of pseudo-science. The great wonder remained to be stated by Scripture instead, and it was not a particle of dead matter warmed by the sun into life, but there was instead the Virgin Birth of Jesus. That’s the wonder of the ages. James Seiss believes that it was such an event that the prophecy of it ‘was stamped in the form of stars in the heavens. He calls our attention to the fact that in the grand gallery of the ancient constellations, Virgo, the form and figure of a virgin, holds the first place. The initiative sign of the Zodiac is called Virgo, the Virgin.

All the traditions, names, and mythologies connected with it recognize and emphasize the virginity of this woman. Astrea and Athene of Greek story identify with her. In Hebrew and Syriac she is Bethulah, the maiden. In Arabic she is Adarah, the pure virgin. In Greek she is Parthenos, the maid of virgin pureness. Nor is there any authority in the world for regarding her as anything but a virgin.

But the greater wonder is, that motherhood attends this virginity (in the sign in the heavens, the same as in the text.) and in the whole teaching of Scriptures, respecting the maternity of our Saviour. He believes that it was out of the study of the heavens that men reached a conviction that inscribed on an altar in Gaul at least one hundred years before Christ was born, “to the virgin who is to bring forth”. Luke records the preparation for the appearance of the Holy Child. Beginning with the fifth verse of this first chapter and ending with the seventh verse of the second, he elaborates to tell the true events that led up to the greatest of all events, the birth of Jesus. When we were students in the theological seminary, the most graphic thing Dr. Broadus used to do in the New Testament class, was to describe as vividly as he, the great master of speech could, the priestly service of Zacharias, who, while he wrought in his office, was visited by an angel of the Lord, come to announce the child to Elizabeth, a woman past age, and how the old priest was stricken dumb, and so left as a sign of the certainty of the promise till John, the Baptist, was born. Dr. Broadus used to lay his finger upon his lips and make signs as Zacharias did to show that something marvelous had happened, while he was within the veil. Then he proceeded to tell how Elizabeth visited her cousin, Mary, to share with her the approaching great honor. While Elizabeth’s child was to be the forerunner, the voice in the wilderness pleading with the people to make straight the way for the coming King, Mary’s child was to be the very Lord Himself. There are men among us now who hold both these revelations to scorn—men who do not believe that angels ever visibly appeared—men who do not believe that old women ever gave birth to children—and men who do not believe that Christ could have been begotten save by natural generation. Strange to say, some of these men still assume to be Christians, and, God save the mark, some of them profess to be preachers. But the best that they can do is to preach “Jesus” the Man. Whereas, the great Apostle reminds us that the true minister preaches “Christ”, the Virgin Birth, the Anointed of the Lord, “and Him crucified”. I very much doubt if there are any fewer angels in heaven now than there were two thousand years ago, and I am quite convinced that angels are just as willing to appear on earth, talk with men, tell them of coming events, comfort them in despair, strengthen them in weakness, build them up in hope, as they ever were. But, as man gets farther from the day when ‘he literally walked with God, in Eden’s garden, he gets farther from desire to fellowship Him and from expectation of any touch from heaven. In other words, infidelity broadens the space between the physical and spirit world, or if not, then it obscures our vision of the holy ones who hover around us and would fain tell us great and important truths. Yes, it is just possible to be in the midst of the angels and in elbow touch with the heavenly hosts and not even know their nearness, much less see their forms. Do we not recall how when Elisha lived, heaven often came down to earth and men and angels walked and talked together. Can we forget that day when the King of Syria was sore troubled, called his servants in, said unto them, “Will you not show me which of them is for the King of Israel?” “And one of his servants said, None, my lord, O king: but Elisha, the prophet that is in Israel, telleth the king of Israel the words that thou speakest in thy bedchamber. “And he said, Go and spy where he is, that I may send and fetch him. And it was told him, saying, Behold, he is in Dothan. “Therefore sent he thither horses, and chariots, and a great host: and they came by night, and compassed the city about. “And when the servant of the man of God was risen early, and gone forth, behold, an host compassed the city both with horses and chariots. And his servant said unto him, Alas, my master! how shall we do? “And he answered, Fear not: for they that be with us are more than they that be with them. “And Elisha prayed, and said, LORD, I pray thee, open his eyes, that he may see. And the LORD opened the eyes of the young man; and he saw: and, behold, the mountain was full of horses and chariots of fire round about Elisha.” I cannot feel that God and angels in heaven are far removed from earth and men. Certainly this Scripture would impress us both of their nearness and their interest in us and all that concerns our lives here below. Matthew alone records the conduct and the character of Joseph. It is in Matthew’s Gospel that Joseph’s high character and noble conduct are revealed in connection with the discovery that Mary, his espoused wife, was with child. The text says, “He was a just man, and not willing to make her a publick example, was minded to put her away privily”. Certainly, therein is the proof of the remark, “The just man”. How any husband could ever make a public ensample of a woman who had been his wife, publish to the world her sin and by the way of the public press spread to the ends of the earth her name, scandalized, is past my conception. Furthermore, Joseph wasn’t decided positively to even put her away privily, for while he was thinking on that very subject, debating whether he should do it or not, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying: “Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary, thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for He shall save His people from their sins”. I have often thought that men have misinterpreted their master. It is true that Jesus Christ, in answer to the Pharisees said that “for one cause, a writing of divorcement, might be given and a wife’ put away”, but He never said, “that even for that cause, it should be done”. On the contrary, He clearly intimated the opposite, adding, “Moses, because of the hardness of your heart, suffered you to put away your wife, but from the beginning it was not so”. The greatest social injustice has long existed in the circumstance that a man discovering his wife to have made one misstep, has been approved and almost applauded by putting her away. He might do it publicly. He might be brutal about the whole procedure, and yet society seemed to set its stamp of commendation upon the act and in half the instances, the very man who with pious pride put her away, has himself been guilty of transgressing God’s law again and again. I grant you that the time has come when wives, more often put away husbands than husbands put away wives. For every divorce secured by a man now, there are half a dozen by women. So that if the Scripture were being penned at this time, the Pharisees question would take another form. “Is it lawful for a woman to put away her husband for every or any cause?” Incompatability of temper; failure to sufficiently provide, brutal looks, if not blows, desertion, in fact, a dozen unbiblical defences fill the courts daily. Joseph will forever be an example to men and women alike of how to be just and how to wait on God until one has divine direction before he take a step that may bring him under condemnation; break the heart of innocence, grieve and offend God. As it was Mary’s suffering in connection with her unspeakable honor, past imagination, had she been put away on this account, the dart that pierced her soul when Christ was crucified, would not have been more undeserved, deadly and damning than Joseph’s act. It is recorded to his credit that, being a just man, he sought by his own reason to do what he did do in such a way as to bring the least humiliation and cause the least shame. And being a prayerful man, he was lifted out of his whole difficulty, shown the better way and given to share forever glory and joy of kinship to the Son of God, the King of Glory. Both Matthew and Luke announce the great event (Matthew 1:22-25; Luke 1:6-7). On this point, three of the four Gospels converge, for while only Matthew and Luke directly record the birth of Jesus, John joins with them in the announcement under another form. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was God, and the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us”. Tonight this phonograph to my right will reproduce the very tones of Our loved friend, America’s silver-tongued orator, William Jennings Bryan, and in voice he will live again to defend the Virgin Birth as an event as reasonable as clear in revelation, as an event that illustrated the infinite wisdom of God and coming down to man’s level, that he might lift man up to the plane of his own fulness in heaven; and the tongue that is stilled today and the sound of it is buried far beneath the sod in Arlington, will seem to speak again on the greatest subject that ever engaged angels or men. The Virgin Birth is the basis of Christianity, the explanation of Christ, whose spiritual generation was the prophecy of the regeneration of sinners, by the same Holy Ghost, with its prospect of immortality, and an eternal heaven. How noble the conclusion of this chapter (Matthew 1:24-25). The sacred holiness that was about her very person, Joseph respected and “he knew her not”, and the unthinkable world blessing that would come with her babe, he comprehended. That fact is clearly voiced in the name that Joseph gave him, JESUS, SAVIOUR. “Blessed Be the Name!”