BibleDaily Readings
cog

Settings

OLD TESTAMENTNEW TESTAMENT
Matthew
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
Mark
12345678910111213141516
Luke
123456789101112131415161718192021222324
John
123456789101112131415161718192021
Acts
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
Romans
12345678910111213141516
1 Corinthians
12345678910111213141516
2 Corinthians
12345678910111213
Galatians
123456
Ephesians
123456
Philippians
1234
Colossians
1234
1 Thessalonians
12345
2 Thessalonians
123
1 Timothy
123456
2 Timothy
1234
Titus
123
Philemon
1
Hebrews
12345678910111213
James
12345
1 Peter
12345
2 Peter
123
1 John
12345
2 John
1
3 John
1
Jude
1
Revelation
12345678910111213141516171819202122

Luke 3:23

And Jesus himself was about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, who was the son of Heli,
Read Chapter 3

Ambrose of Milan

AD 397
You see that the description of descent is connected by the old custom from the fathers to the sons and from the sons to the fathers. You see that the family is everywhere listed through the generations of the husband. Do not marvel if Matthew reports the order of the generations from Abraham to Joseph, and Luke from Joseph to Adam and to God. Do not marvel that Joseph’s lineage is described. Indeed, being born according to the flesh, he must follow the usage of the flesh, and he who came into the world must be described in the custom of the world, particularly as the lineage of Mary is also in the lineage of Joseph. For since Joseph was a righteous man, he took a wife from his own tribe and his own country, nor could a righteous man contravene what is prescribed in the law. “The inheritance of the people of Israel shall not be transferred from one tribe to another. For every one of the people of Israel shall cleave to the inheritance of the tribe of his fathers. Every daughter who pos...
1 min1/19
Go to Commentary

Ambrose of Milan

AD 397
Rightly as was supposed, since in reality He was not, but was supposed to be so, because Mary who was espoused to Joseph was His mother. But we might doubt why the descent of Joseph is described rather than that of Mary, (seeing that Mary brought forth Christof the Holy Spirit, while Joseph seemed to be out of the line of our Lord's descent,) were wenot informed of the custom of the Holy Scripture, which always seeks the origin of the husband, and especially in this case, since in Joseph's descent we also find that of Mary. For Joseph being a just man took a wife really from his own tribe and country, and so at the time of the taxing Joseph went up from the family and country of David to be taxed with Mary his wife. She who gives in the returns from the same family and country, shows herself to be of that family and country. Hence He goes on in the descent of Joseph, and adds, Who was the son of Eli. But let us consider the fact, that St. Matthew makes Jacob, who was the father of Jose...
6 mins2/19
Go to Commentary

Ambrose of Milan

AD 397
Yet it seems needful to explain why St. Matthew began to enumerate the descent of Christ from Abraham but St. Luke led it from Christ up to God. But first I think we should not set aside by any means the question why St. Matthew, when he began the order of descent from Abraham, did not say, “The Book of the Generation of Abraham,” but “The Book of the Generation of Jesus Christ, the Son of David, the Son of Abraham.” Why he named these two in particular…. The Evangelist selected those two authors of the race, the one who received the promise concerning the congregation of the nations, the other who obtained the prophecy of the generation of Christ. Although he is later in the order of the succession, yet he is described before Abraham in the generation of the Lord, because it is more to have received the promise concerning Christ than that concerning the church, since the church itself is through Christ. Then there is one prince of the race according to the flesh, and another according...
1 min3/19
Go to Commentary

Ambrose of Milan

AD 397
Here too some … raise issues: that Matthew counted fortytwo generations from Abraham to Christ, but Luke fifty, and that Matthew reported that the generation descended through some persons, and Luke mentioned others. In this matter, you can test what we said. Although Matthew wove some forefathers of the divine lineage, but Luke others, into the order of generation, nevertheless each indicated that the remaining ancestors were from the race of Abraham and David. Matthew thought the generation should be derived through Solomon, but Luke through Nathan. This fact seems to show both a royal and a priestly family of Christ. We should not consider one account truer than the other, but that the one agrees with the other in equal faith and truth. According to the flesh, Jesus was truly of a royal and priestly family, King from kings, Priest from priests. Although the prophecy pertains not to the carnal but the celestial, since a King exults in the power of God, to whom judgment is committed b...
1 min4/19
Go to Commentary

Ambrose of Milan

AD 397
He could not include more sons of Jacob, lest he seem to digress outside the generations in an irrelevant series. Of course, in the case of other, that is, distant, descendants of the patriarchs, Luke did not think the names should be omitted, but that those of Joseph, Judah, Simeon and Levi should be preferred beyond the rest. We know that there were four kinds of virtues in those from whom they were descended. In Judah, the mystery of the Lord’s passion was prefigured. In Joseph, an example of chastity went before. In Simeon, the payment for violated virginity was represented. In Levi, the office of a priest was symbolized. We observe the dignity of prophecy manifested also through Nathan so that because Christ Jesus is one and all, diverse kinds of virtues went before also in individual forefathers.
1 min5/19
Go to Commentary

Ambrose of Milan

AD 397
Therefore Luke also thought that his origin should be traced back to God. Because God is the true Father of Christ, either the Father according to the true generation or the Author of the mystical gift—according to the regeneration of baptism. Furthermore, he did not start by describing his generation but first set forth his baptism. He desired to show him as God, the Author of all, weaving everything together through baptism. He also stated that Christ derived from God in the order of succession, in order to prove him the Son of God according to nature, according to grace and according to the flesh. Then what clearer evidence is there of divine generation than that before speaking of Jesus’ generation, Luke has the Father himself saying, “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased”? Exposition of the Gospel of Luke
1 min6/19
Go to Commentary

Ambrose of Milan

AD 397
It benefits no one to change what is written: “Who was thought to be the son of Joseph.” For it was right that he was “thought” so, because he was not the Joseph’s son by nature but was thought to be his Son, because he was born of Mary, who was engaged to Joseph, her husband. So you have: “Is not this Joseph the carpenter’s son?” Exposition of the Gospel of Luke
< 1 min7/19
Go to Commentary

Augustine of Hippo

AD 430
Or in another way; Matthew descends from David through Salomon to Joseph: but Luke beginning from Eli, who was in the line of our Savior, ascends through the line of; Nathan the son of David, and joins the tribes of Eli and Joseph, showing that they are both of the same family, and thereby that the Savior was not only the Son of Joseph, but also of Eli. For by the same reason by which the Savior is called the son of Joseph, he is also the son of Eli, and of all the rest who are of the same tribe. Hence that which the Apostle says, Of whom are the fathers, and from whom. Christ came according to the flesh. Or there occur three reasons, by one of which the Evangelist was led. For either one Evangelist has mentioned the father by whom Joseph was, begotten, but the other his maternal grandfather, or some one of his ancestors. Or one of the fathers mentioned was the natural father of Joseph, the other his father who had adopted him. Or after the manner of the Jews, when aman has died withou...
4 mins8/19
Go to Commentary

Bede

AD 735
The thrice ten years also which our Savior had passed when Hewas baptized might intimate also the mystery of our baptism, because of the faith in the Trinity, and the obedience to the Decalogue. Or else, Jacob, taking the wife of his brother Eli who had died without children according to the command of the law, begot Joseph, by natural parentage his own son, but by the ordinance of the law the son of Eli. The name and generation of Cainan, according to the Hebrew reading, is found neither in Genesis, nor in the Chronicles, but Arphaxad is states to have begot Sala his son, without any one intervening. Know then that Luke borrowed this generation from the Septuagint, where it is written, that Arphaxad at a hundred and thirty-five years old begotCainan, but he at a hundred and thirty years begot Sala. It follows, Who was the son ofArphaxad. But rightly rising up from the baptized Son of God to God the Father, he places Enoch in the seventy seventh step, who, having put off death, was tra...
1 min9/19
Go to Commentary

Cornelius a Lapide

AD 1637
And Jesus Himself began to be about thirty years old. "Beginning" refers not to "thirty years," for then "about" would be redundant, but to the public preaching of Jesus, for which He was sent by the Father. Having been declared in His baptism the Messiah, the Teacher, Lawgiver, and Saviour of the world by the Dove and by the voice of the Father, and when He was therefore beginning to exercise this His function, and to teach the Gospel law and preach publicly, Jesus "was about thirty years old." This is plain from the Greek, which has, "And Jesus was about thirty years beginning," i.e, when He began to preach. So Jansenius, Baronius, and others. Observe the "about;" he does not state definitely whether Jesus was exactly thirty. If we suppose Him to have been born in the forty-second year of Augustus, Jesus was, in this year of His baptism—the fifteenth of Tiberius—completing His twenty-ninth year and beginning His thirtieth. But if He were born in the forty-first of Augustus He was no...
6 mins10/19
Go to Commentary

Cyril of Alexandria

AD 444
Although in truth Christ had no father according to the flesh, yet some fancied he had a father. Hence it follows, As was supposed the son of Joseph.
< 1 min11/19
Go to Commentary

Eusebius of Caesarea

AD 339
Let us then more carefully explain the meaning of the words themselves. For if when Matthew affirmed Joseph to be the son of Jacob, Luke had in like manner affirmed that Joseph was the son of Eli, there would be some dispute. But seeing the case is that Matthew gives his opinion, Luke repeats the common opinion of many, not his own, saying, as was supposed, I do not think that there is any room for doubt. For since there were among the Jews different opinions of the genealogy of Christ, and yet all traced Him up to David because to him the promises were made, while many affirmed that Christ would come through Solomon and the other kings, some shunned this opinion because of the many crimes related of their kings, and because Jeremiah said of Jechonias that &#8220;a man should not rise of his seed to sit on the throne of David.&#8221; This last view Luke takes, though conscious that Matthew gives the real truth of the genealogy. This is the first reason. The next is a deeper one. For Ma...
2 mins12/19
Go to Commentary

Glossa Ordinaria

AD 1480
By interpretation then Eli means, &#8220;My God,&#8221; or &#8220;climbing&#8221;;Who was the son of Mat that, i.e. &#8220;forgiving sins.&#8221; Who was as the son of Levi, i.e. &#8220;beingadded.&#8221;. David is interpreted, &#8220;with amighty arm, strong in fight.&#8221; Obith, i.e. &#8220;slavery.&#8221; Booz, i.e. &#8220;strong.&#8221; Salmon, i.e. &#8220;capableof feeling, or peacemaking.&#8221; Naas son, i.e. &#8220;augury, or belonging to serpents.&#8221; Aminadal, &#8220;thepeople being willing.&#8221; Aram, i.e. &#8220;upright, or lofty.&#8221; Esro1n, i.e. &#8220;an arrow.&#8221; Phares, i.e.&#8220;division.&#8221; Judah, i.e. &#8220;confessing.&#8221; Who was the son of Jacob, i.e. &#8220;supplanted.&#8221; Isaac, i.e.&#8220;laughing or joy.&#8221; Abraham, i.e. &#8220;the father of many nations, or the people.&#8221;. Which is interpreted, &#8220;finding out,&#8221; or&#8220;wickedness.&#8221; Nachor, i.e. &#8220;the light rested.&#8221; Sarug, i.e. &#8220;correction,&#8...
1 min13/19
Go to Commentary

Greek Expositor

AD 1000
For this reason also He came at thirty years to be baptized, to show that spiritual regeneration makes men perfect as far as regards their spiritual life.
< 1 min14/19
Go to Commentary

Gregory The Dialogist

AD 604
NAZ. We must therefore consider who He was who was baptized, and by whom and when: seeing He was pure, baptized by John, and at a time when His miracles had begun, that we might thence derive the lesson of purifying ourselves beforehand, and of embracing humility, and of not beginning to preach until the maturity of our spiritual and natural life. The first of these wassaid for their sakes who are receiving baptism; for although the gift of baptism brings remission, yet we must fear lest we return again to our vomit. The second is pointed at those who exalt themselves against the stewards of the mysteries, whom they may excel in rank. The third was uttered for those who trust in their youth, and imagine that any age is fit for promotion and teaching. Jesus is cleansed, and cost you despise purification? By John, and cost you say ought against your teacher. At thirty years old, but cost you in teaching precede your elders? But the example of Daniel and the like are ready in your mouth, ...
2 mins15/19
Go to Commentary

Irenaeus of Lyons

AD 202
And for this reason they affirm it was that the "Saviour"-for they do not please to call Him "Lord"-did no work in public during the space of thirty years. For how could He have had disciples, if He did not teach? And how could He have taught, unless He had reached the age of a Master? For when He came to be baptized, He had not yet completed His thirtieth year, but was beginning to be about thirty years of age (for thus Luke, who has mentioned His years, has expressed it: "Now Jesus was, as it were, beginning to be thirty years old"
1 min16/19
Go to Commentary

John Chrysostom

AD 407
Or, He waited accomplishing the whole law until that age which takes in every sin, that none might say that He abrogated the law because He was not able to fulfill it. But because this part of the Gospel consists of aseries of names, men think there is nothing valuable to be derived therefrom. Lest then we should feel this, let us try to examine every step. For from the mere name we may extract an abundant treasure, for names are indicative of many things. For they savor of the Divine mercy and the offerings of thanks by women, who when they obtained sons gave a name significant of the gift. Matthew, who wrote as for the Jews, had no further object than to show that Christ proceeded from Abraham and David, for this was most grateful to the Jews. Luke however, as speaking to all men in common, carried his account beyond as far even as Adam. Hence it follows, Who was the son of Thara.
1 min17/19
Go to Commentary

Julius Africanus

AD 240
But if, with Luke, we reckon them from Nathan the son of David, in like manner the third from the end is Mel chi, whose son was Heli the father of Joseph. For Joseph was the son of Hell, the son of Mel chi.
< 1 min18/19
Go to Commentary

Theophilus of Antioch

AD 184
For this reason he closes the generations in God, that we may learn that those fathers who intervene, Christ will raise up to God, and make them sons of God, and that it might be believed also that the birth of Christ was without seed; as if he said, If you believes&#8221; not that the second Adam was made without seed, you must come to the first Adam, and you will find that he was made by God without seed.
< 1 min19/19
Go to Commentary
About Privacy Policy Donate

Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation - 2 Peter 1:20

App Store LogoPlay Store Logo