Reverting to the question of the true parentage of Zerubbabel, we have

drawn attention to the fact that the records appear contradictory, Zerubbabel

is said to be the son of Shealtiel (Salathiel), in Ezra 3:2,8, and in 5:2,

also in Nehemiah and Haggai, prophets and instruments in the return from the

captivity.  In the genealogy of 1 Chronicles 3:19, Zerubbabel is said to be

the 'son of Pedaiah', and Salathiel and Pedaiah were brothers.  It is evident

that Ezra, Nehemiah and Haggai were at pains to stress the descent of

Zerubbabel from Salathiel, and to avoid any reference to Pedaiah, the reason

appears to be that Pedaiah, the true father of Zerubbabel, being the actual

son of Jechoniah, was precluded any further right to the throne of David, but

that Salathiel, whose father is recorded by Luke to have been 'Neri ... the

son of Nathan, which was the son of David', had succeeded to the royal title

and was therefore looked upon as the son of Jechoniah by legal adoption, the

royal line being transferred from the line of Solomon to the line of Nathan

at this point, possibly by a marriage between the two families.

The answer, therefore, to the problems raised appears to be this:

Matthew relates the genealogy of Joseph; Luke the genealogy of Mary.  Mary's

genealogy becomes necessary because of the bar that was set up to any of the

seed of Coniah.  The crown rights being forfeited, Nathan's line succeeds and

so although attacked from within and without, the Saviour that was born at

Bethlehem has the full right to the throne of David.  We now consider one or

two subsidiary evidences that go to confirm this line of teaching.  Dr.

Lightfoot draws attention to the genealogy given in Genesis 36:2: 'Aholibamah

the daughter of Anah the daughter of Zibeon'.

Every reader, not made aware of the problem, would naturally assume

upon reading this entry, that Anah was the daughter of Zibeon.  But Anah was

a man (Gen. 36:24,25); Anah was the father of Aholibamah.  In like manner,

the title, 'The Son' in Luke 3:23, is never again used in the genealogy, the

words throughout being in italics, and the genealogy reads:

Jesus was the legal son of Joseph

Jesus was the son of Matthat

Jesus was the son of Levi

until the end of the record which does not tell us that Adam was the son of

God, but

Jesus which was the Son of God.

We are familiar with the blessed words of Revelation 22:16 where the

Saviour declares His Divine and Human nature, being not only the 'offspring'

but the 'root' of David, but we may not have given sufficient heed to the

prophetic statement of Isaiah 11:1:

'... there shall come forth a Rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a

Branch shall grow out of his roots'.

These words do not suggest a straightforward growth, but rather picture

a 'stem', i.e., the 'stock' of a tree that had been cut down, sending forth a

'sucker', not from the stem of the tree in the normal way, but from the

roots, as though making a fresh start.  Job uses this figure saying:

'For there is hope of a tree, if it be cut down, that it will sprout

again, and that the tender branch thereof will not cease.  Though the