2BeLikeChrist Bible Commentary - Luke Chapter 3
Commentary - Luke Chapter 3
Luke 3:1-2
Luk 3:1 In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate being governor of Judea, and Herod being tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip tetrarch of the region of Ituraea and Trachonitis, and Lysanias tetrarch of Abilene,
Luk 3:2 during the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John the son of Zechariah in the wilderness.
The details at the opening of this chapter are important because they tell us a significant amount of time has passed since the events of chapters 1 and 2.
Caesar Augustus died in 14 A.D. and was succeeded by his stepson, Tiberius.
Tiberius would reign as emperor of Rome until 37 A.D.
So the remainder of the events recorded in Luke’s gospel took place in the reign of Tiberius.
(A bust of emperor Tiberius)
In Mark 12 when Jesus asked for a coin and said, “Render to Ceasar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s,” it was Tiberius’ face looking up at Him from the coin.
Who was Pontius Pilate?
Pilate was the 5th Roman governor of the region of Judea.
He was preceded as governor by Valarius Gratis.
Historical records of his life and rule are sparse and many of the details of his reign are still debated.
He remained in the office of governor for 10 years according to Josephus (Antiquities 18.4.2).
Pilate had many run-ins with the Jews which eventually led to his removal.
Pilate is most famous for permitted the Jews to crucify Jesus.
Who was Herod the tetrarch of Galilee?
Tetrarch = (Greek: “ruler of a quarter”) in Greco-Roman antiquity, the ruler of a principality; originally the ruler of one-quarter of a region or province (Britannica).
This Herod was also known as Herod Antipas.
He was one of the sons of Herod the Great who was king of Judea when Jesus was born.
Relations:
Herod Antipas was the son of Herod the Great with Malthrace
Herod Archelaus was Antipas’ full brother through Malthrace
Herod II (Philip) was Antipas’ half-brother through Mariamme II
Antipas reigned over Galilee and an area known as Perea.
Antipas’ brother Archelaus ruled Judea until 6 AD (Mat 2:22).
Antipas’ half-brother Philip reigned in the area of the Golan Heights.
Understanding this division gives clarity to Joseph’s decision to move to Nazareth in Matthew 2.
Antipas was the man who had John, Zechariah and Elizabeth’s son, thrown in prison because he condemned Herod for marrying his brother’s wife (see Matthew 14).
Who was Philip?
As mentioned, Philip was Herod Antipas’ half brother who ruled the regions of Ituraea and Trachonitis (same as “Batanea”).
He was married to Herodias, but she left him to live with Herod Antipas.
He built the city of Caesarea Philippi (hence the name).
He also did a lot to advance the city of Bethsaida, a city Jesus spent time in.
Josephus wrote, “He also advanced the village Bethsaida, situate at the lake of Gennesareth, unto the dignity of a city; both by the number of inhabitants it contained, and its other grandeur: and called it by the name of Julias; the same name with Cesar’s daughter (Antiquities 18.5.1).
He reigned until his death in the 20th year of Tiberius Caesar (33 or 34 A.D.).
Ituraea and Trachonitis were then absorbed into the territory of Tiberius as Philip had no heir.
Who was Lysanias tetrarch of Abilene?
Abilene (not the one in Texas) is a small region north of Philip’s territory in Ituraea and Trachonitis.
It sits to the west of the city of Damascus.
Lysanias’ reign is mentioned by Josephus in Antiquities 19.5.1 and Jewish Wars 2.12.8.
His kingdom was later given to Agrippa by Emperor Claudius.
Who were Annas and Caiaphas?
Joseph Caiaphas was appointed high priest by the Roman governor Valarius Gratus (governor before Pontus Pilate).
Before Caiaphas, Annas (Luke 3:1-2) was appointed High Priest of Judaea in 6 A.D., but was removed by the Romans in 15 A.D.
Although Annas had been removed, it is thought he still pulled many strings in the background.
The fact that Jesus was brought to Annas first during His trial in John 18 is a statement of how much power and influence he still had even though he “technically” had been removed from office.
Caiaphas was Annas’ son-in-law.
5 of Annas’ sons would proceed him as high priests.
Caiaphas was removed by the Romans in 37 A.D.
SIDE NOTE: The Law of God required the high priests to be descendant of the tribe of Levi.
In the 1st Century, this law was no longer being respected.
The Romans turned the position of High Priest into a position of political appointment for allies and those willing to pay the largest bribes.
It was time for a new High Priest.
The book of Hebrews is going to tell us how Jesus stepped in to became the new High Priest.
By giving us this list of historical leaders, Luke is setting the scene on which he will reintroduce us to a 30 year old John.
In Luke 1:80 we were told John wasn’t a city dwelling man, instead he dwelt in the wilderness of Judea.
Luk 1:80 And the child grew and became strong in spirit, and he was in the wilderness until the day of his public appearance to Israel.
This wilderness was/is on the west side of the Dead Sea and east of Jerusalem.
The wilderness descends from the hill country of Judea down to the Dead Sea, which is the lowest land point on earth (413 meters/1,355 feet below sea level).
If you search for “wilderness of Judea” on YouTube you will find some great videos highlighting the region.
Luke 3:3-6
Luk 3:3 And he went into all the region around the Jordan, proclaiming a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.
Luk 3:4 As it is written in the book of the words of Isaiah the prophet, “The voice of one crying in the wilderness: ‘Prepare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.
Luk 3:5 Every valley shall be filled, and every mountain and hill shall be made low, and the crooked shall become straight, and the rough places shall become level ways,
Luk 3:6 and all flesh shall see the salvation of God.’”
John spent his time in the wilderness baptizing for the forgiveness of sins.
The concept of spiritual cleansing by immersion in water was not a completely new concept to the Jews.
The existence of “mikveh,” Jewish ritual cleansing pools, as early as the Hasmonean Period have been discovered by archaeologists.
Jewish ritual cleansing of people and household items by immersion is described in the Mishnah (collection of the Jewish oral traditions).
Some individuals who had become ceremonially unclean were required to be immersed in water before being pronounced “clean.”
New converts to Judaism were required to be immersed.
The Jews had very specific rules for the kind of water in which these individuals needed to be immersed.
As with the Jewish handwashing traditions, these rituals had nothing to do with cleansing dirt from the body. They were a ceremonial washing for spiritual cleanliness.
For more information, check out Mishnah Mikva'ot.
John’s baptism shared similarities with the Jewish purification ritual but was different in significant ways.
Being unclean under the Old Testament system didn’t necessarily mean the unclean person had sinned.
So, the immersion of the Jews in the mikveh wasn’t equivalent to having their sins washed away, but it was a good picture of the transition of a person from the dirtiness of sin to the cleanliness of righteousness.
John’s baptism offered forgiveness of sins through the power and sacrifice of the coming Messiah.
This would have been a huge mindset change for the Jews because when they thought about having sins forgiven, they probably thought about the need to offer animals as sacrifices.
The closest thing the Jews had to forgiveness of sins were the priestly sacrifices offered in the Temple.
Upon hearing John’s message, some of the Jews may have asked, “what about the sacrifices? How will our sins be forgiven without a sacrifice?”
What they didn’t know was that God was going to be arranging the sacrifice for them (Jesus, the Lamb of God).
To a 1st Century Jew, purification by immersion in water would have been a familiar concept. But having sins forgiven through immersion in water would have been a new concept.
The prophecy in verses 4-6 is from Isaiah 40:3-4.
John didn’t just come out of nowhere. He wasn’t a man who just woke up one day and decided he would start preaching about the Messiah. He was specifically designated by God to fill a role that had been prophesied about in the Old Testament. He was to “prepare the way” for Jesus.
We’ve already discussed the miraculous announcement of his birth by the angel Gabriel.
But that wasn’t the only foretelling of John’s birth and life.
Isaiah, who lived approximately 750 years before this time, spoke of a man who would precede the Messiah.
Isaiah’s prophecy is what Luke was citing in verses 4-6.
In ancient days, especially before roads were common, whenever a king/military commander would go on a journey, he would send part of his entourage ahead of his caravan/army to prepare the way.
They would build bridges, fill potholes in the path, cut trees to make clearings for camps, shape new roads, find fresh water sources, etc…
This is the picture in the words of the prophecy.
“Prepare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight. Every valley shall be filled, and every mountain and hill shall be made low, and the crooked shall become straight, and the rough places shall become level ways…”
In the same way, John was sent before Jesus to prepare the way for the King of the Kingdom of Heaven.
John wasn’t going to physically reshape the land on which the Messiah was going to walk.
His job was to spiritually prepare the hearts of the Jewish people for the Messiah’s arrival and subsequent teaching.
Luke 3:7-8
Luk 3:7 He said therefore to the crowds that came out to be baptized by him, “You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come?
Luk 3:8 Bear fruits in keeping with repentance. And do not begin to say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father.’ For I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children for Abraham.
Luke tells us John addressed the “crowds” when speaking these words.
Matthew tells us these words were specifically addressed to the Pharisees and Sadducees.
The Pharisees and Sadducees will appear many times throughout the rest of Luke, so it will be beneficial to know something about them.
Who were the Pharisees?
They were generally made up of wealthy men (sometimes merchants or businessmen) who turned their attention to religion. They had significant influence among the common Jewish citizens.
They promoted strict adherence to the Old Testament Laws and oral traditions.
They promoted Jewish culture rather than Hellenization.
They believed in the supernatural.
They believed in an afterlife
Who were the Sadducees?
They came from the upper economic class of the Jews (contrast with Jesus followers). They had significant influence with the governing Roman authorities.
They rejected the Pharisees’ binding of tradition. Viewed the written
Torah (first 5 books of the Old Testament) as the only binding law.
They were more friendly to Hellenization.
They had limited belief in the supernatural.
They rejected the resurrection of the body, the afterlife, and the existence of angels.
They were responsible for the Temple in Jerusalem (upkeep, management, and daily affairs).
As we continue through Luke’s book, we will see the Pharisees and Sadducees at continual odds with Jesus. Having read the descriptions above, it is not hard to see why…
The Pharisees didn’t like Jesus because He repeatedly condemned them for creating unauthorized laws and rules that they bound on their fellow Jews. In addition, Jesus condemned them for their hypocrisy, because they didn’t even keep the laws they bound on others.
The Sadducees didn’t like Jesus because He was always talking about the afterlife, and resurrection, and angels, and was just generally WAY to supernatural for their liking. They also disliked Him because He threatened their lucrative money-making operation at the Temple and condemned them for turning Temple worship into a business for profit.
John wasted no time pointing out the moral failures of these two sects.
He called them a “brood of vipers.”
Essentially a family of snakes.
Snakes are rarely viewed in a positive light in the Bible.
They are symbols of deception and evil and venom.
This is probably due to the appearance of Satan in the Garden of Eden as a serpent (Genesis 3).
John may have been eluding to Satan when calling the Pharisees and Sadducees snakes.
They were part of Satan’s family and were accomplishing his work.
In John, we see Jesus directly call these people the children of the Devil.
Joh 8:44 You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires.
In Matthew 23:33, Jesus says, “You serpents, you brood of vipers, how are you to escape being sentenced to hell?
Some people think Jesus may have been calling up a familiar farming scene in these words.
When farmers burned piles of chaff/stubble from their filed, snakes would slither out to escape the flames.
But there would be no escape for the brood of vipers in the fire of hell.
Yikes!
Application:
Not everything Jesus and His disciples said would be considered “loving and accepting” by our modern culture.
I recently got into a discussion with some people who were promoting gay rights who tried to argue Jesus’ whole message was one of “love and acceptance.”
In reality, Jesus and His disciples often called people to repentance and told them their lives needed to change if they wanted to please God.
Jesus wasn’t afraid to condemn the lifestyles of those who were living in ungodly ways.
This is important to remember because there is a lot of misrepresentation of Jesus going on in the world.
SIDE NOTE:
If you know the story of the venomous serpents who killed the Israelites in the wilderness (Numbers 21) you may also be familiar with Jesus telling Nicodemus He (Jesus) would be like the bronze serpent lifted up in the wilderness for the people’s salvation.
In 1st Century terms, Jesus was lifted up on the cross to save the people from the venom of the “brood of vipers” who were a spiritual threat to the people.
John called the Jewish religious leaders to repentance.
“Bearing fruit” is a way the Bible talks about a person’s actions.
People are often pictured as trees that bear fruit.
Good people bear good fruit.
Bad people bear bad fruit.
*This is a bit of an oversimplification but the fuller picture will become clear as we study through the text.*
John calls these Pharisees and Sadducees to repent, to stop bearing bad fruit, and start doing the things God wanted them to do (bear good fruit).
John advised them of the future judgement and punishment that awaited them if they didn’t repent (the wrath to come).
He warned them of the danger of assuming their right standing with God because of their descendance from Abraham.
Abraham was considered the “father” of the Jewish nation.
Many Jews thought they were right with God solely due to the fact they were a part of God’s chosen people (Abraham’s children).
John informed the hypocritical Pharisees and Sadducees they would not be saved on the basis of their pedigree.
They needed to repent of their hypocrisy and ungodliness.
Their bloodline wasn’t what pleased God.
If God wanted to, He could turn the stones of the wilderness into Jews.
God was interested in obedient hearts, not their family’s heritage.
APPLICATION: Do we assume we are in a right relationship with God because we claim the name Christian? Here we have an example of those who claimed the name “Jew” (God’s chosen people), but were very far removed from God. You can verbally claim the name Christian but it is your heart that tells the true story.
Luke 3:9
Luk 3:9 Even now the axe is laid to the root of the trees. Every tree therefore that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.”
If you had an orchard, what would you do with a tree that for years grew nothing but bad fruit?
You would probably cut it down.
It takes up valuable vineyard space.
It takes nutrients from the soil and produces nothing of value.
In a similar way, God cuts down those who don’t produce good fruit.
John told them to repent and if they refused, they would have to answer to God.
The image of the axe being laid at the root of the tree gives a sense of nearness to their potential judgement.
God had had enough and was ready at any time to judge them.
SPOILER: In 70 A.D. God’s anger at the hypocritical Jews arrived in the form of the Roman empire intent on destroying Jerusalem.
Within one lifetime the axe was picked up and the tree chopped down.
This message was probably pretty shocking to a lot of Jews because many of them had the idea the Messiah was coming to establish a kingdom and restore the Jewish nation to prominence in the world while bringing judgement on all their enemies.
They thought the Messiah was going to be 100% positively biased towards the Jews.
They thought they were going to be the apple of His eye.
They thought He was all about giving them victory.
John’s introduction of the idea that the Messiah was coming to judge them for wickedness probably took some of the Jews aback.
Luke 3:10-14
Luk 3:10 And the crowds asked him, “What then shall we do?”
Luk 3:11 And he answered them, “Whoever has two tunics is to share with him who has none, and whoever has food is to do likewise.”
Luk 3:12 Tax collectors also came to be baptized and said to him, “Teacher, what shall we do?”
Luk 3:13 And he said to them, “Collect no more than you are authorized to do.”
Luk 3:14 Soldiers also asked him, “And we, what shall we do?” And he said to them, “Do not extort money from anyone by threats or by false accusation, and be content with your wages.”
These verses don’t need a whole lot of explanation.
Essentially, John was telling the Jews what the Old Testament Law had already told them.
They were to love God supremely and love their neighbor as themselves.
If you are well off and have two tunics and you love God and your neighbor, you will share one of them with someone less fortunate.
If you are a tax collector and you love God and your neighbor, you won’t demand more taxes than a person actually owes so you can skim the extra off the top (tax collectors were notorious for this in 1st Century Judea).
If you are a soldier and you love God and your neighbor, you won’t extort money from people by threatening to have them arrested on phony charges if they don’t fork over some cash. You are going to be thankful and content with the wages that you earn.
This teaching wasn’t necessarily groundbreaking, but it was necessary to remind people about the parts of the Law that were often neglected.
Additionally, it was necessary for John to remind the people about these principles because the people who should have been exemplifying them (Pharisees and Saducees) failed to model them for the people.
They stressed the importance of certain doctrines to the finest detail, but then neglected obvious commands about loving God and their neighbors.
APPLICATION:
This can still happen in churches.
People spend so much time debating and enforcing certain doctrines and forget about some of the most basic and most plain teachings of God.
We can get caught up in the details and minutia of the Scriptures and completely neglect the big and simple commands.
Luke 3:15-17
Luk 3:15 As the people were in expectation, and all were questioning in their hearts concerning John, whether he might be the Christ,
Luk 3:16 John answered them all, saying, “I baptize you with water, but he who is mightier than I is coming, the strap of whose sandals I am not worthy to untie. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.
Luk 3:17 His winnowing fork is in his hand, to clear his threshing floor and to gather the wheat into his barn, but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire.”
John was baptizing and teaching and it had people wondering, “Maybe he is the Messiah?!”
John answered them with clarity.
Someone greater than him (Messiah) was coming.
He wasn’t Him!
He humbled himself and told the people he wasn’t even worthy to assume the role of a common servant and untie the sandals of the Messiah.
John, never for a moment, confused people about who he was and the work he had been given to do.
He didn’t claim to be something greater than what he was.
He always pointed people to Jesus.
APPLICATION:
This should be our attitude as Christians.
We aren’t here to steal some of the attention that belongs to Jesus.
The only thing special about us is what Jesus has given us.
We need to be as clear and as willing to bounce people’s attention off of ourselves and on to Jesus.
That isn’t easy!
John compared his baptism with the baptism that the Messiah was going to implement.
John’s baptism was one of water for the forgiveness of sins, but it was still only a precursor to the full image of Jesus’ baptism.
Those baptized into Jesus are baptized into an image of His death, burial, and resurrection (Romans 6:1-11)
Obviously, that had not happened yet when John was preaching.
Jesus’ baptism would come with 2 marks:
1.The Holy Spirit - likely referencing the gift of the Holy Spirit given to baptized believers on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:38).
2. With Fire – In light of verse 9 and 17, this likely refers to the fires of judgement on the wicked.
Jesus’ baptism would give the Holy Spirit as a powerful gift to believers, but it would bring nothing but judgement on those who rejected it.
The point was, there were significant differences between John’s baptism and the baptism Jesus was going to institute.
In verse 12, Jesus references a winnowing fork
This fork was used to throw grain into the air so that the chaff (bad part of the crop) would blow away in the breeze, while the wheat (the good part) would fall to the ground. The chaff would then be burned, and the wheat gathered into the barn.
Those who genuinely repented would be gathered into God’s house (the barn) but the unrepentant (Scribes and Pharisees) would face judgement (be burned).
Notice, just as the axe was laid at the root of the tree, the winnowing fork was in the hand of the farmer, perhaps signifying God was prepared to execute judgment at any time.
Luke 3:18-20
Luk 3:18 So with many other exhortations he preached good news to the people.
Luk 3:19 But Herod the tetrarch, who had been reproved by him for Herodias, his brother's wife, and for all the evil things that Herod had done,
Luk 3:20 added this to them all, that he locked up John in prison.
John was a bold man, so bold in fact he condemned, not just the Jewish religious leaders, but one of the regional leaders mentioned at the beginning of the chapter.
Herod Philip II’s wife, Herodias, had left him in order to marry his half-brother, Herod Antipas.
John condemned the new union.
Mat 14:3-4 For Herod had seized John and bound him and put him in prison for the sake of Herodias, his brother Philip's wife, because John had been saying to him, “It is not lawful for you to have her.”
Evidently, John also condemned other things Herod had done (verse 19).
Herodias wanted John killed for speaking up against her adulterous decision.
So, Antipas had him thrown into prison.
*You can check out the Matthew 14 notes for a more in-depth discussion of this situation.*
Other details about John’s ministry are recoded in the other gospel accounts.
In Luke, John’s ministry starts at the beginning of chapter 3 and by the end of the chapter he is already locked up in prison.
Luke 3:21-22
Luk 3:21 Now when all the people were baptized, and when Jesus also had been baptized and was praying, the heavens were opened,
Luk 3:22 and the Holy Spirit descended on him in bodily form, like a dove; and a voice came from heaven, “You are my beloved Son; with you I am well pleased.”
Sometime after John’s condemnation of the Pharisees and Sadducees, Jesus came from Galilee to Jordan to be baptized.
Why did Jesus need to be baptized?
Obviously, Jesus wasn’t baptized for the forgiveness of sins.
Jesus was sinless.
Jesus said His baptism was necessary to “fulfill all righteousness” (Matthew 3:15).
The term “fulfilling” usually indicates that an action has been taken which requires a follow-up.
Example: You place an order on Amazon.com, Amazon then “fulfills” your order.
Example: A prophecy is made, that prophecy is later “fulfilled.”
Jesus’ baptism confirmed the fulfillment of long-standing prophecies in the Old Testament.
Jesus was confirming that John is, in fact, the prophesied forerunner of the Messiah. Allowing Himself to be baptized by John communicated His approval of John’s message to the onlookers.
He was also announcing the fulfillment of the prophecies about a coming Messiah, by claiming that identity for Himself.
The icing on the cake immediately follows in verse 22.
The Holy Spirit descended on Jesus in the physical form of a dove.
As we’ve observed in the last few chapters, the Holy Spirit’s presence was typically not visible.
The Holy Spirit was in John, Zechariah, Elizabeth, and Mary but there is no evidence His presence was visible in any way, rather He worked invisibly within them.
Here the Spirit takes on a visible form to visually confirm the identity of Jesus to the onlookers.
And God (a voice from Heaven) gives the final confirmation of Jesus’ identity.
So, to sum up:
Jesus confirmed that John’s message was from God.
Jesus confirmed that He was the Messiah from God.
The Holy Spirit confirmed Jesus as the Messiah.
God then confirmed all three claims.
This would have been a powerful sign to all of the Jews present that the Christ had finally arrived.
THE GENEALOGY OF JESUS FROM JESUS TO ADAM
Luke 3:23-38
Luk 3:23 Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age, being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli,
Luk 3:24 the son of Matthat, the son of Levi, the son of Melchi, the son of Jannai, the son of Joseph,
Luk 3:25 the son of Mattathias, the son of Amos, the son of Nahum, the son of Esli, the son of Naggai,
Luk 3:26 the son of Maath, the son of Mattathias, the son of Semein, the son of Josech, the son of Joda,
Luk 3:27 the son of Joanan, the son of Rhesa, the son of Zerubbabel, the son of Shealtiel, the son of Neri,
Luk 3:28 the son of Melchi, the son of Addi, the son of Cosam, the son of Elmadam, the son of Er,
Luk 3:29 the son of Joshua, the son of Eliezer, the son of Jorim, the son of Matthat, the son of Levi,
Luk 3:30 the son of Simeon, the son of Judah, the son of Joseph, the son of Jonam, the son of Eliakim,
Luk 3:31 the son of Melea, the son of Menna, the son of Mattatha, the son of Nathan, the son of David,
Luk 3:32 the son of Jesse, the son of Obed, the son of Boaz, the son of Sala, the son of Nahshon,
Luk 3:33 the son of Amminadab, the son of Admin, the son of Arni, the son of Hezron, the son of Perez, the son of Judah,
Luk 3:34 the son of Jacob, the son of Isaac, the son of Abraham, the son of Terah, the son of Nahor,
Luk 3:35 the son of Serug, the son of Reu, the son of Peleg, the son of Eber, the son of Shelah,
Luk 3:36 the son of Cainan, the son of Arphaxad, the son of Shem, the son of Noah, the son of Lamech,
Luk 3:37 the son of Methuselah, the son of Enoch, the son of Jared, the son of Mahalaleel, the son of Cainan,
Luk 3:38 the son of Enos, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God.
There is so much to talk about here, let’s begin by mentioning the difficult part of this passage.
If you’ve read the book of Matthew, you’ll know Matthew’s book begins with a genealogy of Jesus.
The difficulty arises when you compare the names in Matthew’s list with the names in Luke’s list.
The names are different.
Not just a little different, they are a lot different!
Both of the family trees list Joseph as Jesus’ “earthly father” but give different names for the father of Joseph.
How can we reconcile these two texts?
There are several theories about how to accomplish a harmony between the two gospel writer’s lists.
If you want, you can spend many hours digging into all of the details of the different theories (I know because I did it lol).
I struggled with how many possible theories and how many details of each theory to cover in this study.
In the end, I decided only to include the solution that seems most plausible to me and a few points of explanation.
I encourage everyone to look into the other possible solutions.
I believe the best harmony of these two genealogies is to understand Matthew’s list as the bloodline descendance of Joseph and Luke’s list as the bloodline descendance of Mary.
One might immediately object, “But Luke clearly says Joseph was the son of Heli” (3:23) therefore Luke cannot be talking about Mary’s bloodline.
The obvious objection to this theory is that Luke explicitly lists Joseph as Jesus’s predecessor, with no mention of Mary: “And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli” (Luke 3:23, KJV). Supporters [of the theory]… say that the genealogical language is not as precise here as it is in Matthew. The early Greek manuscripts read “Joseph, of Heli” “the son” is an editorial insertion, acknowledged by italics in the King James Version. Luke does not use the verb gennaō (Hebrew for “to father” or “to beget”) that Matthew uses to describe the relationship between the two generations, which leaves it open to speculation that perhaps Joseph was the son-in-law, not the biological son, of Heli (thejesusquestion.org).
The punctuation of this verse was also not present in the original, and some translators suggest that the closed parenthesis belongs after “Joseph” instead of after “supposed,” as in “Jesus . . . being the son (as was supposed of Joseph) of Heli.” With this formulation the implication would be that Jesus’s maternal grandfather, Heli, is his closest male ancestor.
Some commentators have gone even further to suggest that Mary’s father, Heli, had no sons, so he made Joseph his adoptive heir when he and Mary wed. (See Numbers 27:1–11, 1 Chronicles 2:34–35, Ezra 2:61, and Nehemiah 7:63 for Jewish precedents.)
If Luke really is tracing Mary’s ancestry, then why not just say so? Because like most ancient cultures, the Hebrews omitted women’s names from genealogical records. Luke (unlike Matthew, who very brazenly cites four women in his genealogy for Jesus) is simply following custom by sticking to male names only.
It would have been natural for Luke, who acknowledges the unique case of the virgin birth, to give the maternal genealogy of Jesus, even if that meant expressing it a bit awkwardly in the traditional patrilineal style. Not only that, but Luke’s Gospel often focuses on Mary’s perspective…(thejesusquestion.org).
I would also encourage you to look into the “levarite solution” (sometimes called the Africanus solution) to explain the differences between Matthew and Luke.
Its possible Joseph had two fathers.
There was a command in the Old Testament (Deuteronomy 25:5-10) where, if a man’s brother died, and that brother didn’t have any kids, the living brother was supposed to marry his dead brothers widow (his sister-in-law) and have children with her so those children could carry on the family linage of their father.
It is possible Joseph’s mother was married, her husband died before they were able to have kids, she married her brother-in-law and Joseph was born to that union.
This would leave Joseph with a legal father (his mom’s first husband) and a blood father (his mom’s second husband).
A bit confusing… I know… but a plausible explanation when you get your head wrapped around the details.
Whether Mary’s family tree or Joseph’s family tree through 2 fathers, the genealogy is significant to establish Jesus’ legitimate claim as the Messiah.
God promised king David his throne would endure forever (2 Samuel 7:12-16).
How was God going to make that happen?
The Messiah was going to claim David’s throne and reign forever (Luke 1:32-33).
In order to claim the throne, the Messiah needed to be a legitimate son of David, an heir to the throne.
Luke 3:31 shows Jesus was a direct descendent of King David.
Matthew’s genealogy shows Jesus’ direct connection to the royal line.
Solomon, Rehoboam, Josiah, and Hezekiah are all mentioned in Matthew’s list of names and they were all kings of the Jewish nation.
Jesus was from the royal line of kings, but there was a problem with that royal line, it was cursed.
King Jechoniah/Jeconiah (also known as Jehoiachin, or Coniah) was cursed by God.
God cursed Jechoniah through the prophet Jeremiah and told him none of his offspring would succeed him in sitting on the throne.
Jeremiah 22:30 Thus says the LORD: “Write this man down as childless, a man who shall not succeed in his days, for none of his offspring shall succeed in sitting on the throne of David and ruling again in Judah.”
Luke’s genealogy is significant in showing us Jesus had a connection back to King David that didn’t run through the cursed line of Jechoniah.
The genealogy in Luke 3 runs through David’s son Nathan, not Solomon, who was the descendent of Jechoniah.
So, Matthew’s gospel establishes the royalty of Jesus ancestry and Luke’s gospel makes it clear His blood was free of the curse and fit to claim the throne.
