The Genealogy of Jesus: Luke begins his record of the genealogy of Jesus, as the supposed son of Joseph, the husband of Mary, by tracing His lineage through His mother’s line all the way back to Adam—the first human—and ultimately God. Luke’s genealogy follows Jesus’s ancestry in reverse order. Luke’s genealogy of Jesus emphasizes His true humanity and universal mission, showing that He is the promised Redeemer for all people.
The parallel Gospel account for Luke 3:23-38 is Matthew 1:1-17.
In Luke 3:23-38, Luke presents Jesus’s genealogy tracing His lineage through Mary, the wife of Joseph (Jesus’s adoptive father), all the way back to Adam, highlighting Jesus’s connection to all humanity and His identity as the Son of God.
When He began His ministry, Jesus Himself was about thirty years of age (v 23a).
Luke 2 tells of Jesus at the age of twelve learning in the temple courts. After giving an account of John the Baptizer’s ministry (Luke 3:1-20), Luke then describes Jesus’s baptism (Luke 3:21-22) which initiated His ministry.
His ministry refers to Jesus’s public Messianic ministry as the Christ. Christ means “Anointed One or “the Messiah.” Jesus was the Messiah. For the first thirty years of Jesus’s life, Jesus lived in ordinary obscurity in Bethlehem (Matthew 1:25 - 2:12, Luke 2:1-38), Egypt (Matthew 2:13-20), and Nazareth (Matthew 2:21-23,Luke 2:39-40). But when He was about thirty years of age, Jesus began to actively reveal Himself as the Messiah.
His ministrybeganwhenHewasabout thirty years of age.
The Bible is relatively silent about the time between His boyhood and His Messianic ministry (Luke 2:52), although it appears that Jesus learned the trade of being a craftsman from His adopted father, Joseph (Matthew 13:55a, Mark 6:3a). And Jesus had as few as six half-siblings (Matthew 13:55b-54a, Mark 6:3b).
In Jewish culture, thirty years old is the age when a man is considered to have entered full stature of adulthood, ready for serious responsibility, leadership, and life’s burdens (Mishnah. Avot 5:21).
Thirtyyears of age was the age when:
A Levite could enter priestly service. (Numbers 4:3)
Joseph stood before Pharaoh. (Genesis 41:46)
David became king. (2 Samuel 5:4)
Ezekiel began having prophetic visions. (Ezekiel 1:1)
Jesus beganHis Messianic Ministry. (Luke 3:23)
Luke’s account is the only gospel to specify Jesus’s age when His ministry began. This is one example of numerous biographical details that Luke includes as he describes the earthly life of Jesus Christ. One of Luke’s main purposes was to demonstrate the full humanity of Jesus, who was not only the Messiah and the Son of God, but He was also the perfect human.
Luke includes a genealogy of Jesus to demonstrate the fullness of His humanity.
Establishing the fullness of Jesus’s humanity was one of Luke’s core purposes. Luke’s primary readers were the Greek Christians. The Greeks were obsessed with humanity and their quest to discover “the Good Life.” Luke presents Jesus as He is—the perfect human. And Luke demonstrates that the path to “the Good Life” is following His teachings and example of overcoming trials by faith in God.
Unlike Matthew’s genealogical account of Jesus, which traces His lineage through King David and Abraham and was thus presented to demonstrate to Matthew’s Jewish readers that Jesus was the promised Messiah (Matthew 1:1-17), Luke’s account stretches back to the first human: “Adam, the son of God” (Luke 3:38).
Matthew’s genealogy is the Biblical record of Jesus’s kingly lineage (Matthew 1:1-17).
Luke’s genealogy is the Biblical record that biographically details the facts of Jesus’s human lineage.
Luke’s genealogy roots Jesus within the long line of humanity, showing that He shares in the same flesh and blood as every person who came before Him. By tracing His lineage through generations of ordinary men, Luke demonstrates that the Son of God entered fully into the human condition. Jesus was not an angel or divine avatar. He was the Word made flesh (John 1:14)—God born into the human family. Jesus was no more or less human than any other descendent of Adam.
Jesus is the second Adam (1 Corinthians 15:45).
God’s plan of humanity’s redemption came from within the human race. And it was accomplished by the perfect human who completely fulfilled God’s law (Matthew 5:17,John 19:30) as He overcame every temptation and trial by faith (Luke 22:42,Philippians 2:6-8).
It was fitting that the Son of God, the One who would save humanity, first became completely one of us as a son of man (Romans 5:18-19,Hebrews 2:10, 2:18). Humans were “crowned” with the “glory and honor” of reigning over creation (Hebrews 2:5-8). But when they fell, they lost that privilege to Satan (Hebrews 2:9,John 12:31). Jesus was made a little lower than the angels, being born as a human, and was “crowned” with the “glory and honor” of having authority over all things as a human because He submitted to His Father’s will and endured the “suffering of death” (Hebrews 2:9,Philippians 2:8-10).
While Luke’s genealogy does not elaborate on these points (Luke was writing a biographical account of Jesus’s humanity, not a full exposition of human history like those found in the epistles or the prologue of John—John 1:1-18). His account emphasizing Jesus’s humanity gives a historical basis supporting the claims found elsewhere in the New Testament.
Before we dive into the text of Luke’s genealogy of Jesus, we would do well to point out three more basic differences between his account and Matthew’s (Matthew 1:1-17).
1. Matthew and Luke’s Genealogical Accounts move in different directions
Matthew’s account progresses from the past toward the present (Abraham to Jesus). The effect of Matthew’s account exalts the Messiah from Abraham through David and ends with Jesus, the King (Matthew 1:1, 1:17).
Jesus’s genealogy in the Book of Matthew is traced from Abraham through David and Solomon to Joseph, husband of Mary, to Jesus. As an adopted first son of Joseph, Jesus had the legal rights of a firstborn’s inheritance, including Joseph’s genealogical claim to David’s throne. Matthew shows his Jewish audience that Jesus is the fulfillment of the promise to Abraham and the rightful Jewish heir as King of the Jews.
Luke’s account regresses and works backward further into the past, spanning from Jesus to Adam. The effect of Luke’s account firmly grounds Jesus’s identity in the human race all the way back to Adam.
Luke is showing his Gentile audience that Jesus represents all of humankind. Jesus is a “son of God,” just as Adam’s origin is straight from God (Luke 3:38).
2. Matthew’s account mentions forty-two generations between Abraham and Jesus, while Luke’s account mentions seventy-seven generations between Jesus and Adam.
Matthew seems to skip some generations in his genealogy to list the number of 14 generations between Abraham and David, David and the Exile, and the Exile to Jesus.
“So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; from David to the deportation to Babylon, fourteen generations; and from the deportation to Babylon to the Messiah, fourteen generations.” (Matthew 1:17)
Matthew deliberately structures his genealogy of Jesus into three sets of fourteen generations. He appears to be using Gematria. Gematria is a Jewish method of assigning numerical values to Hebrew letters to convey deeper meaning. Each letter has the same numeric value as its order in the alphabet—i.e. the Hebrew letter “dalet” has the numeric value of 4 because it is the fourth letter in the Hebrew alphabet.
In Hebrew, the name David (דָּוִד) is composed of the letters dalet (4), vav (6), and dalet (4), which together total 14.
By organizing his genealogical record into three groups of fourteen, Matthew appears to symbolically highlight Jesus as the ultimate “Son of David.” This numerical pattern reinforces the central claim of his Gospel: that Jesus is the long-awaited Messiah and rightful heir to David’s throne, fulfilling God’s covenant promises to Israel.
By comparison, Luke’s genealogy of Jesus is much longer and more comprehensive.
Rather than emphasizing a numerical pattern, Luke carefully traces Jesus’s lineage backward all the way to Adam, the first man. Whereas Matthew begins with Abraham to David to highlight Jesus’s Jewish and royal heritage, Luke begins with Jesus and moves backward through seventy-seven generations to underscore His universal humanity.
Luke’s account preserves more names and skips fewer generations, likely reflecting his concern for historical completeness rather than symbolic structure. By connecting Jesus not only to David but ultimately to Adam—and to God Himself—Luke presents Jesus as the Son of Man, born into the full stream of human history to redeem all mankind, not Israel alone.
The number seventy-seven in Hebraic numerology symbolizes complete fullness, divine perfection multiplied, and often represents spiritual restoration or ultimate completion brought by God.
In Hebrew numerology, seven is the number of divine completeness or perfection. This is seen in creation (seven days), Sabbath rest, and covenantal wholeness. When seven is doubled or intensified (as in seventy-seven), it suggests the fullness of divine perfection multiplied with divine perfection—perfection squared—or a complete work of God brought to its ultimate conclusion.
By listing seventy-seven generations from Adam to Jesus, Luke conveys that God’s redemptive plan has reached its complete fulfillment in Christ. The number signifies that in Jesus, the perfect human and the perfect fullness of God’s mercy, forgiveness, and perfection has entered human history. Jesus is the culmination of divine completeness.
3. Matthew and Luke’s record seem to trace different parents.
Matthew’s account traces Jesus’s lineage through Joseph, His adoptive father, the husband of Mary (Matthew 1:16).
Luke’s account appears to trace Jesus’s lineage through Mary, His mother. Luke traces the lineage backwards from Jesus, apparently through Mary who was a descendant of “Nathan the son of David” (Luke 3:31), “Abraham” (Luke 3:34), and all the way to “Adam” (Luke 3:38).
We will explain more about how Luke seems to indicate that his genealogical account of Jesus’s lineage runs through Mary when we discuss the second half of verse 23.
being, as was supposed, the son of Joseph, the son of Eli (v 23b).
being as was supposed, the son of Joseph
In Hebrew, the name Joseph (יוֹסֵף, “Yôsēp̄”) means “He will add” or “may Yahweh add.” It expresses the hope that God would increase or multiply blessings, descendants, or favor.
Through Jesus, God added salvation, grace, and eternal life to humanity. And Jesus was the fulfillment of blessings from the Abrahamic covenant (Genesis 12:2-3, 22:18, Acts 3:25-26,Romans 4:13,Galatians 3:16, 3:29).
This is the first of four Josephs listed in Luke’s genealogy. Joseph may have been named after the patriarch, Joseph. Jacob gave the name of “Joseph” to his first son from his beloved wife, Rachel. Joseph’s half-brothers were jealous of him. They sold Joseph into slavery, where he unjustly suffered, but was later exalted in Egypt and later saved his brothers’ lives from famine.
Joseph the son of Jacob preserved physical life for Israel during a time of famine (Genesis 45:5-7). Joseph, the husband of Mary, protected and provided for the infant Jesus, so Jesus could save the world (Matthew 2:13-23).
Luke uses the expression—being as was supposed—to clearly emphasize from the outset of Jesus’s lineage, that Jesus was NOT Joseph actual or biological son. Though many people mistakenly supposed He was.
Because He was God, Jesus had always existed and had no biological father. Mary conceived Jesus as a virgin when the Holy Spirit came upon her (Luke 1:35). Before He was born to Mary, Jesus had eternally existed as the Son of God (John 1:1).
Luke makes it clear that God is Jesus’s Father in the verse before verse 23 when the voice came out of heaven at Jesus’s baptism, saying to Jesus: “You are My beloved Son, in You I am well pleased” (Luke 3:22).
People supposed that Jesus was Joseph’s son for one of two reasons (or both).
One reason people might have supposed that Jesus was Joseph’s son was because Joseph was the husband of Mary the mother of Jesus, and he was betrothed to her before they were married. The people supposed that if the child were not his, Joseph would have known the child was not his and that Mary had been unfaithful to him and that he would have called off the wedding because of her apparent unfaithfulness.
In fact, this was Joseph’s plan, until an angel revealed that Mary was faithful and that the Child she had conceived was of God and would be the Messiah (Matthew 1:18-21).
But when Joseph remained with Mary, some people supposed the reason he did so was because the child was his own.
Another reason people may have supposed that Jesus was Joseph’s son was because Joseph and Mary reared Jesus together. And Joseph raised Jesus with the same love he would have had for Jesus had Jesus been Joseph’s actual son.
Joseph, Jesus’s adoptive father:
Was considered a righteous man (Matthew 1:19)
Was faithful to Mary (Matthew 1:20-25)
Helped protect Jesus (Matthew 1:20-25, 2:13-15, 2:19-22)
Had Jesus circumcised on the eighth day according to the Law of Moses (Luke 2:21)
Offered sacrifice with Mary for the birth of Jesus according to the Law of Moses (Luke 2:22-24).
Attended the feasts in Jerusalem every year (Luke 2:41)
Brought Jesus to Jerusalem for the Passover when He was twelve in preparation for His bar-mitzvah (Luke 2:42)
Joseph also appears to have taught Jesus the trade of being a craftsman (Matthew 13:55a, Mark 6:3a). The Greek word that is translated as “carpenter” in these verses is τέκτων (G5405—pronounced: “ték-tōn”). “Tekton” can mean craftsmen, stonemason, or construction worker.
It is likely that Joseph made a living supporting his family as a construction worker. The Roman city of Sepphoris, located a few miles northeast of Nazareth was rebuilt during Jesus’s early life and adulthood. As “tektons” who lived in Nazareth at that time, it would be reasonable to speculate that both Joseph and Jesus helped construct this city.
Joseph is not recorded as being present during Jesus’s ministry, though Mary, Jesus’s mother, is mentioned many times. This, plus the fact that Jesus calls upon His disciple (John) to take care of His mother when He is on the cross, indicates that Joseph died before Jesus’s public ministry as the Messiah began (John 19:26-27).
Joseph taught Jesus how to be a good Jewish man. He raised his supposed son in accordance with the Law and taught Him how to how to earn an honest living for himself. Joseph was such a good father that people naturally assumed and supposed that Jesus was his son.
It is also possible that people, especially those who were from Nazareth around the time Mary conceived Jesus, supposed that Jesus was Joseph’s son because Joseph married her anyway and for the way he lovingly raised Jesus as his son.
In addition to observing that Jesus was not the actual son of Joseph, Luke does something else that is unusual as he begins his genealogical record of Jesus’s lineage that is worth mentioning.
Luke seems to indicate that the genealogical record that he is about to provide runs, not through Joseph, Jesus’s supposed father, but rather through Mary, Jesus’s biological mother.
To demonstrate how Luke does this, we must first explain a few things about how Jewish genealogies were composed during the first century.
According to Jewish customs, only the father is to be considered in the lineage.
For instance, when the Jewish Talmud discusses inheritance laws, it argues the point that inheritance comes through the father’s lineage,
“The Mishna teaches in the list of those who inherit from and bequeath to each other: Sons with regard to their father.” (Talmud. Bava Batra. 110a. 7)
The Talmud is even more emphatic on this point when it explicitly argues that inheritance strictly comes through the paternal line and explicitly does not come through the maternal line.
“[For the purpose of inheritance and lineage] it is the father’s family that is called [i.e. legally recognized as] one’s family, while one’s mother’s family is not called [legally recognized as] one’s family.” (Talmud. Bava Batra. 109b. 5)
The point the Talmud is making in these statements is that property does not pass from one generation to the next through the mother’s family, but through the father’s family. The Talmud then quotes Numbers 1:2 from the Law of Moses (the Torah) to support its claims about official lineage record keeping:
“Proof for this is found in another verse, as it is written: ‘By their families, by their fathers’ houses’ [Numbers 1:2].” (Talmud. Bava Batra. 109b. 5)
Luke follows the Jewish rules for record lineages when he records Jesus’s genealogy—that is, he only names the names of the men. But since he wishes to trace the line of Jesus’s mother according to Jewish customs, he must do so without mentioning Mary’s name.
The way Luke manages to trace Jesus’s maternal line is apparent in the Greek text, but is obscured in English translations.
In English, it’s grammatically incorrect to use the definite article before a proper name. For example, it is incorrect to say: “the Joseph.”
But in Greek, it is acceptable and quite common to use the definite article before proper names. The Greek New Testament is filled with hundreds, maybe even thousands of instances of these expressions. There are over 270 expressions of ὁ Ἰησοῦς (literally “the Jesus”) alone.
Throughout Luke’s genealogy of Jesus, he uses the definite article in every single instance except one. The only instance Luke does not use the definite article is when he names Joseph.
The omission of the definite article in Greek likely indicates to Luke’s Greek readers that Luke is following the maternal line of Jesus though Joseph’s wife and not the paternal line, through Joseph himself. Unfortunately, in English it is near impossible to render this smoothly.
Thus was Luke able to trace the maternal line of Jesus’s lineage and be in accordance with proper Jewish genealogical customs. He did this naming the father (Joseph) and not the mother (Mary), but he omitted the definite article before Joseph’s name only to indicate that he was tracing Jesus’s heritage through His mother.
The reason Luke wanted to trace Jesus’s lineage through Mary was likely twofold.
The first reason was because Matthew had already traced Jesus’s line through Joseph, His supposed father (Matthew 1:1-17).
The second reason was because Luke wanted to establish Jesus’s humanity. Because Luke wanted to demonstrate that Jesus was fully human, his genealogical account of Jesus had to follow Mary’s lineage and not Joseph’s.
Jesus received His full humanity from His biological mother—Mary. Jesus did not have a biological father. Jesus was conceived in Mary’s womb through the Holy Spirit. Mary was His biological mother who gave birth to Him. Jesus’s human genetics came from Mary. Jesus’s genetics did not come from Joseph. Jesus did not receive any of His humanity through Joseph. All of His humanity came from Mary, which was why Luke, whose Gospel was written to demonstrate Jesus’s humanity, followed His mother’s line and not Joseph’s.
The son of Eli…
Eli was maternal grandfather of Jesus. He is the father of Mary, Jesus’s mother and the wife of Joseph.
The only likely reference in the Bible to this particular Eli is here, in Luke’s genealogy of Jesus.
The only other Eli mentioned in Scripture is Eli the priest, who raised Samuel (1 Samuel 1-4).
Eli’s name in Hebrew means “ascension.” More specifically, it could mean “divine ascent” as “El” is the Hebrew word for “God.”
Jesus embodied the meaning of Eli’s name in four prominent ways.
Jesus is the Holy One who may ascend into the hill of the LORD. (Psalm 24:3-4)
Jesus ascended from the grave. (Matthew 28:6,Mark 16:6,Luke 24:6)
Jesus ascended into Heaven. (Mark 16:19,Luke 24:51,Acts 1:9-10).
Because of Jesus, it is possible for us to ascend into eternal life and be with God forever. (John 11:25,John 14:3)
Luke 3:23
Genealogy of Jesus
23 When He began His ministry, Jesus Himself was about thirty years of age, being, as was supposed, the son of Joseph, the son of Eli,
Set to dark mode
Luke 3:23 meaning
The parallel Gospel account for Luke 3:23-38 is Matthew 1:1-17.
In Luke 3:23-38, Luke presents Jesus’s genealogy tracing His lineage through Mary, the wife of Joseph (Jesus’s adoptive father), all the way back to Adam, highlighting Jesus’s connection to all humanity and His identity as the Son of God.
When He began His ministry, Jesus Himself was about thirty years of age (v 23a).
Luke 2 tells of Jesus at the age of twelve learning in the temple courts. After giving an account of John the Baptizer’s ministry (Luke 3:1-20), Luke then describes Jesus’s baptism (Luke 3:21-22) which initiated His ministry.
His ministry refers to Jesus’s public Messianic ministry as the Christ. Christ means “Anointed One or “the Messiah.” Jesus was the Messiah. For the first thirty years of Jesus’s life, Jesus lived in ordinary obscurity in Bethlehem (Matthew 1:25 - 2:12, Luke 2:1-38), Egypt (Matthew 2:13-20), and Nazareth (Matthew 2:21-23, Luke 2:39-40). But when He was about thirty years of age, Jesus began to actively reveal Himself as the Messiah.
His ministry began when He was about thirty years of age.
The Bible is relatively silent about the time between His boyhood and His Messianic ministry (Luke 2:52), although it appears that Jesus learned the trade of being a craftsman from His adopted father, Joseph (Matthew 13:55a, Mark 6:3a). And Jesus had as few as six half-siblings (Matthew 13:55b-54a, Mark 6:3b).
In Jewish culture, thirty years old is the age when a man is considered to have entered full stature of adulthood, ready for serious responsibility, leadership, and life’s burdens (Mishnah. Avot 5:21).
Thirty years of age was the age when:
(Numbers 4:3)
(Genesis 41:46)
(2 Samuel 5:4)
(Ezekiel 1:1)
(Luke 3:23)
Luke’s account is the only gospel to specify Jesus’s age when His ministry began. This is one example of numerous biographical details that Luke includes as he describes the earthly life of Jesus Christ. One of Luke’s main purposes was to demonstrate the full humanity of Jesus, who was not only the Messiah and the Son of God, but He was also the perfect human.
Luke includes a genealogy of Jesus to demonstrate the fullness of His humanity.
Establishing the fullness of Jesus’s humanity was one of Luke’s core purposes. Luke’s primary readers were the Greek Christians. The Greeks were obsessed with humanity and their quest to discover “the Good Life.” Luke presents Jesus as He is—the perfect human. And Luke demonstrates that the path to “the Good Life” is following His teachings and example of overcoming trials by faith in God.
Unlike Matthew’s genealogical account of Jesus, which traces His lineage through King David and Abraham and was thus presented to demonstrate to Matthew’s Jewish readers that Jesus was the promised Messiah (Matthew 1:1-17), Luke’s account stretches back to the first human: “Adam, the son of God” (Luke 3:38).
Matthew’s genealogy is the Biblical record of Jesus’s kingly lineage (Matthew 1:1-17).
Luke’s genealogy is the Biblical record that biographically details the facts of Jesus’s human lineage.
Luke’s genealogy roots Jesus within the long line of humanity, showing that He shares in the same flesh and blood as every person who came before Him. By tracing His lineage through generations of ordinary men, Luke demonstrates that the Son of God entered fully into the human condition. Jesus was not an angel or divine avatar. He was the Word made flesh (John 1:14)—God born into the human family. Jesus was no more or less human than any other descendent of Adam.
Jesus is the second Adam (1 Corinthians 15:45).
God’s plan of humanity’s redemption came from within the human race. And it was accomplished by the perfect human who completely fulfilled God’s law (Matthew 5:17, John 19:30) as He overcame every temptation and trial by faith (Luke 22:42, Philippians 2:6-8).
It was fitting that the Son of God, the One who would save humanity, first became completely one of us as a son of man (Romans 5:18-19, Hebrews 2:10, 2:18). Humans were “crowned” with the “glory and honor” of reigning over creation (Hebrews 2:5-8). But when they fell, they lost that privilege to Satan (Hebrews 2:9, John 12:31). Jesus was made a little lower than the angels, being born as a human, and was “crowned” with the “glory and honor” of having authority over all things as a human because He submitted to His Father’s will and endured the “suffering of death” (Hebrews 2:9, Philippians 2:8-10).
While Luke’s genealogy does not elaborate on these points (Luke was writing a biographical account of Jesus’s humanity, not a full exposition of human history like those found in the epistles or the prologue of John—John 1:1-18). His account emphasizing Jesus’s humanity gives a historical basis supporting the claims found elsewhere in the New Testament.
Before we dive into the text of Luke’s genealogy of Jesus, we would do well to point out three more basic differences between his account and Matthew’s (Matthew 1:1-17).
1. Matthew and Luke’s Genealogical Accounts move in different directions
Matthew’s account progresses from the past toward the present (Abraham to Jesus). The effect of Matthew’s account exalts the Messiah from Abraham through David and ends with Jesus, the King (Matthew 1:1, 1:17).
Jesus’s genealogy in the Book of Matthew is traced from Abraham through David and Solomon to Joseph, husband of Mary, to Jesus. As an adopted first son of Joseph, Jesus had the legal rights of a firstborn’s inheritance, including Joseph’s genealogical claim to David’s throne. Matthew shows his Jewish audience that Jesus is the fulfillment of the promise to Abraham and the rightful Jewish heir as King of the Jews.
Luke’s account regresses and works backward further into the past, spanning from Jesus to Adam. The effect of Luke’s account firmly grounds Jesus’s identity in the human race all the way back to Adam.
Luke is showing his Gentile audience that Jesus represents all of humankind. Jesus is a “son of God,” just as Adam’s origin is straight from God (Luke 3:38).
2. Matthew’s account mentions forty-two generations between Abraham and Jesus, while Luke’s account mentions seventy-seven generations between Jesus and Adam.
Matthew seems to skip some generations in his genealogy to list the number of 14 generations between Abraham and David, David and the Exile, and the Exile to Jesus.
“So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; from David to the deportation to Babylon, fourteen generations; and from the deportation to Babylon to the Messiah, fourteen generations.”
(Matthew 1:17)
Matthew deliberately structures his genealogy of Jesus into three sets of fourteen generations. He appears to be using Gematria. Gematria is a Jewish method of assigning numerical values to Hebrew letters to convey deeper meaning. Each letter has the same numeric value as its order in the alphabet—i.e. the Hebrew letter “dalet” has the numeric value of 4 because it is the fourth letter in the Hebrew alphabet.
In Hebrew, the name David (דָּוִד) is composed of the letters dalet (4), vav (6), and dalet (4), which together total 14.
By organizing his genealogical record into three groups of fourteen, Matthew appears to symbolically highlight Jesus as the ultimate “Son of David.” This numerical pattern reinforces the central claim of his Gospel: that Jesus is the long-awaited Messiah and rightful heir to David’s throne, fulfilling God’s covenant promises to Israel.
By comparison, Luke’s genealogy of Jesus is much longer and more comprehensive.
Rather than emphasizing a numerical pattern, Luke carefully traces Jesus’s lineage backward all the way to Adam, the first man. Whereas Matthew begins with Abraham to David to highlight Jesus’s Jewish and royal heritage, Luke begins with Jesus and moves backward through seventy-seven generations to underscore His universal humanity.
Luke’s account preserves more names and skips fewer generations, likely reflecting his concern for historical completeness rather than symbolic structure. By connecting Jesus not only to David but ultimately to Adam—and to God Himself—Luke presents Jesus as the Son of Man, born into the full stream of human history to redeem all mankind, not Israel alone.
The number seventy-seven in Hebraic numerology symbolizes complete fullness, divine perfection multiplied, and often represents spiritual restoration or ultimate completion brought by God.
In Hebrew numerology, seven is the number of divine completeness or perfection. This is seen in creation (seven days), Sabbath rest, and covenantal wholeness. When seven is doubled or intensified (as in seventy-seven), it suggests the fullness of divine perfection multiplied with divine perfection—perfection squared—or a complete work of God brought to its ultimate conclusion.
By listing seventy-seven generations from Adam to Jesus, Luke conveys that God’s redemptive plan has reached its complete fulfillment in Christ. The number signifies that in Jesus, the perfect human and the perfect fullness of God’s mercy, forgiveness, and perfection has entered human history. Jesus is the culmination of divine completeness.
3. Matthew and Luke’s record seem to trace different parents.
Matthew’s account traces Jesus’s lineage through Joseph, His adoptive father, the husband of Mary (Matthew 1:16).
Luke’s account appears to trace Jesus’s lineage through Mary, His mother. Luke traces the lineage backwards from Jesus, apparently through Mary who was a descendant of “Nathan the son of David” (Luke 3:31), “Abraham” (Luke 3:34), and all the way to “Adam” (Luke 3:38).
We will explain more about how Luke seems to indicate that his genealogical account of Jesus’s lineage runs through Mary when we discuss the second half of verse 23.
being, as was supposed, the son of Joseph, the son of Eli (v 23b).
being as was supposed, the son of Joseph
In Hebrew, the name Joseph (יוֹסֵף, “Yôsēp̄”) means “He will add” or “may Yahweh add.” It expresses the hope that God would increase or multiply blessings, descendants, or favor.
Through Jesus, God added salvation, grace, and eternal life to humanity. And Jesus was the fulfillment of blessings from the Abrahamic covenant (Genesis 12:2-3, 22:18, Acts 3:25-26, Romans 4:13, Galatians 3:16, 3:29).
This is the first of four Josephs listed in Luke’s genealogy. Joseph may have been named after the patriarch, Joseph. Jacob gave the name of “Joseph” to his first son from his beloved wife, Rachel. Joseph’s half-brothers were jealous of him. They sold Joseph into slavery, where he unjustly suffered, but was later exalted in Egypt and later saved his brothers’ lives from famine.
Joseph the son of Jacob preserved physical life for Israel during a time of famine (Genesis 45:5-7). Joseph, the husband of Mary, protected and provided for the infant Jesus, so Jesus could save the world (Matthew 2:13-23).
Luke uses the expression—being as was supposed—to clearly emphasize from the outset of Jesus’s lineage, that Jesus was NOT Joseph actual or biological son. Though many people mistakenly supposed He was.
Because He was God, Jesus had always existed and had no biological father. Mary conceived Jesus as a virgin when the Holy Spirit came upon her (Luke 1:35). Before He was born to Mary, Jesus had eternally existed as the Son of God (John 1:1).
Luke makes it clear that God is Jesus’s Father in the verse before verse 23 when the voice came out of heaven at Jesus’s baptism, saying to Jesus: “You are My beloved Son, in You I am well pleased” (Luke 3:22).
People supposed that Jesus was Joseph’s son for one of two reasons (or both).
One reason people might have supposed that Jesus was Joseph’s son was because Joseph was the husband of Mary the mother of Jesus, and he was betrothed to her before they were married. The people supposed that if the child were not his, Joseph would have known the child was not his and that Mary had been unfaithful to him and that he would have called off the wedding because of her apparent unfaithfulness.
In fact, this was Joseph’s plan, until an angel revealed that Mary was faithful and that the Child she had conceived was of God and would be the Messiah (Matthew 1:18-21).
But when Joseph remained with Mary, some people supposed the reason he did so was because the child was his own.
Another reason people may have supposed that Jesus was Joseph’s son was because Joseph and Mary reared Jesus together. And Joseph raised Jesus with the same love he would have had for Jesus had Jesus been Joseph’s actual son.
Joseph, Jesus’s adoptive father:
(Matthew 1:19)
(Matthew 1:20-25)
(Matthew 1:20-25, 2:13-15, 2:19-22)
(Luke 2:21)
(Luke 2:22-24).
(Luke 2:41)
(Luke 2:42)
Joseph also appears to have taught Jesus the trade of being a craftsman (Matthew 13:55a, Mark 6:3a). The Greek word that is translated as “carpenter” in these verses is τέκτων (G5405—pronounced: “ték-tōn”). “Tekton” can mean craftsmen, stonemason, or construction worker.
It is likely that Joseph made a living supporting his family as a construction worker. The Roman city of Sepphoris, located a few miles northeast of Nazareth was rebuilt during Jesus’s early life and adulthood. As “tektons” who lived in Nazareth at that time, it would be reasonable to speculate that both Joseph and Jesus helped construct this city.
Joseph is not recorded as being present during Jesus’s ministry, though Mary, Jesus’s mother, is mentioned many times. This, plus the fact that Jesus calls upon His disciple (John) to take care of His mother when He is on the cross, indicates that Joseph died before Jesus’s public ministry as the Messiah began (John 19:26-27).
Joseph taught Jesus how to be a good Jewish man. He raised his supposed son in accordance with the Law and taught Him how to how to earn an honest living for himself. Joseph was such a good father that people naturally assumed and supposed that Jesus was his son.
It is also possible that people, especially those who were from Nazareth around the time Mary conceived Jesus, supposed that Jesus was Joseph’s son because Joseph married her anyway and for the way he lovingly raised Jesus as his son.
In addition to observing that Jesus was not the actual son of Joseph, Luke does something else that is unusual as he begins his genealogical record of Jesus’s lineage that is worth mentioning.
Luke seems to indicate that the genealogical record that he is about to provide runs, not through Joseph, Jesus’s supposed father, but rather through Mary, Jesus’s biological mother.
To demonstrate how Luke does this, we must first explain a few things about how Jewish genealogies were composed during the first century.
According to Jewish customs, only the father is to be considered in the lineage.
For instance, when the Jewish Talmud discusses inheritance laws, it argues the point that inheritance comes through the father’s lineage,
“The Mishna teaches in the list of those who inherit from and bequeath to each other: Sons with regard to their father.”
(Talmud. Bava Batra. 110a. 7)
The Talmud is even more emphatic on this point when it explicitly argues that inheritance strictly comes through the paternal line and explicitly does not come through the maternal line.
“[For the purpose of inheritance and lineage] it is the father’s family that is called [i.e. legally recognized as] one’s family, while one’s mother’s family is not called [legally recognized as] one’s family.”
(Talmud. Bava Batra. 109b. 5)
The point the Talmud is making in these statements is that property does not pass from one generation to the next through the mother’s family, but through the father’s family. The Talmud then quotes Numbers 1:2 from the Law of Moses (the Torah) to support its claims about official lineage record keeping:
“Proof for this is found in another verse, as it is written: ‘By their families, by their fathers’ houses’ [Numbers 1:2].”
(Talmud. Bava Batra. 109b. 5)
Luke follows the Jewish rules for record lineages when he records Jesus’s genealogy—that is, he only names the names of the men. But since he wishes to trace the line of Jesus’s mother according to Jewish customs, he must do so without mentioning Mary’s name.
The way Luke manages to trace Jesus’s maternal line is apparent in the Greek text, but is obscured in English translations.
In English, it’s grammatically incorrect to use the definite article before a proper name. For example, it is incorrect to say: “the Joseph.”
But in Greek, it is acceptable and quite common to use the definite article before proper names. The Greek New Testament is filled with hundreds, maybe even thousands of instances of these expressions. There are over 270 expressions of ὁ Ἰησοῦς (literally “the Jesus”) alone.
Throughout Luke’s genealogy of Jesus, he uses the definite article in every single instance except one. The only instance Luke does not use the definite article is when he names Joseph.
The omission of the definite article in Greek likely indicates to Luke’s Greek readers that Luke is following the maternal line of Jesus though Joseph’s wife and not the paternal line, through Joseph himself. Unfortunately, in English it is near impossible to render this smoothly.
Thus was Luke able to trace the maternal line of Jesus’s lineage and be in accordance with proper Jewish genealogical customs. He did this naming the father (Joseph) and not the mother (Mary), but he omitted the definite article before Joseph’s name only to indicate that he was tracing Jesus’s heritage through His mother.
The reason Luke wanted to trace Jesus’s lineage through Mary was likely twofold.
The first reason was because Matthew had already traced Jesus’s line through Joseph, His supposed father (Matthew 1:1-17).
The second reason was because Luke wanted to establish Jesus’s humanity. Because Luke wanted to demonstrate that Jesus was fully human, his genealogical account of Jesus had to follow Mary’s lineage and not Joseph’s.
Jesus received His full humanity from His biological mother—Mary. Jesus did not have a biological father. Jesus was conceived in Mary’s womb through the Holy Spirit. Mary was His biological mother who gave birth to Him. Jesus’s human genetics came from Mary. Jesus’s genetics did not come from Joseph. Jesus did not receive any of His humanity through Joseph. All of His humanity came from Mary, which was why Luke, whose Gospel was written to demonstrate Jesus’s humanity, followed His mother’s line and not Joseph’s.
The son of Eli…
Eli was maternal grandfather of Jesus. He is the father of Mary, Jesus’s mother and the wife of Joseph.
The only likely reference in the Bible to this particular Eli is here, in Luke’s genealogy of Jesus.
The only other Eli mentioned in Scripture is Eli the priest, who raised Samuel (1 Samuel 1-4).
Eli’s name in Hebrew means “ascension.” More specifically, it could mean “divine ascent” as “El” is the Hebrew word for “God.”
Jesus embodied the meaning of Eli’s name in four prominent ways.
(Psalm 24:3-4)
(Matthew 28:6, Mark 16:6, Luke 24:6)
(Mark 16:19, Luke 24:51, Acts 1:9-10).
(John 11:25, John 14:3)