34 Which was the son of Jacob, G2384 which was the son of Isaac, G2464 which was the son of Abraham, G11 which was the son of Thara, G2291 which was the son of Nachor, G3493
And Nahor H5152 lived H2421 nine H8672 and twenty H6242 years, H8141 and begat H3205 Terah: H8646 And Nahor H5152 lived H2421 after H310 he begat H3205 Terah H8646 an hundred H3967 H8141 and nineteen H6240 H8672 years, H8141 and begat H3205 sons H1121 and daughters. H1323 And Terah H8646 lived H2421 seventy H7657 years, H8141 and begat H3205 Abram, H87 Nahor, H5152 and Haran. H2039 Now these are the generations H8435 of Terah: H8646 Terah H8646 begat H3205 Abram, H87 Nahor, H5152 and Haran; H2039 and Haran H2039 begat H3205 Lot. H3876 And Haran H2039 died H4191 before H6440 his father H1 Terah H8646 in the land H776 of his nativity, H4138 in Ur H218 of the Chaldees. H3778 And Abram H87 and Nahor H5152 took H3947 them wives: H802 the name H8034 of Abram's H87 wife H802 was Sarai; H8297 and the name H8034 of Nahor's H5152 wife, H802 Milcah, H4435 the daughter H1323 of Haran, H2039 the father H1 of Milcah, H4435 and the father H1 of Iscah. H3252 But Sarai H8297 was barren; H6135 she had no child. H2056 And Terah H8646 took H3947 Abram H87 his son, H1121 and Lot H3876 the son H1121 of Haran H2039 his son's H1121 son, H1121 and Sarai H8297 his daughter in law, H3618 his son H1121 Abram's H87 wife; H802 and they went forth H3318 with them from Ur H218 of the Chaldees, H3778 to go H3212 into the land H776 of Canaan; H3667 and they came H935 unto Haran, H2771 and dwelt H3427 there. And the days H3117 of Terah H8646 were two hundred H3967 H8141 and five H2568 years: H8141 and Terah H8646 died H4191 in Haran. H2771
Worthy.Bible » Commentaries » Matthew Henry Commentary » Commentary on Luke 3
Commentary on Luke 3 Matthew Henry Commentary
Chapter 3
Nothing is related concerning our Lord Jesus from his twelfth year to his entrance on his thirtieth year. We often think it would have been a pleasure and advantage to us if we had journals, or at least annuls, of occurrences concerning him; but we have as much as Infinite Wisdom thought fit to communicate to us, and, if we improve not that, neither should we have improved more if we had had it. The great intention of the evangelists was to give us an account of the gospel of Christ, which we are to believe, and by which we hope for salvation: now that began in the ministry and baptism of John, and therefore they hasten to give us an account of that. We could wish, perhaps, that Luke had wholly passed by what was related by Matthew and Mark, and had written only what was new, as he has done in his two first chapters. But it was the will of the Spirit that some things should be established out of the mouth, not only of two, but of three witnesses; and we must not reckon it a needless repetition, nor shall we do so if we renew out meditations upon these things, with suitable affections. In this chapter we have,
Luk 3:1-14
John's baptism introducing a new dispensation, it was requisite that we should have a particular account of it. Glorious things were said of John, what a distinguished favourite of Heaven he should be, and what a great blessing to this earth (ch. 1:15, 17); but we lost him in the deserts, and there he remains until the day of his showing unto Israel, ch. 1:80. And now at last that day dawns, and a welcome day it was to them that waited for it more than they that waited for the morning. Observe here,
Luk 3:15-20
We are now drawing near to the appearance of our Lord Jesus publicly; the Sun will not be long after the morning-star. We are here told,
The evangelist concludes his account of John's preaching with an et caetera (v. 18): Many other things in his exhortation preached he unto the people, which are not recorded.
Luk 3:21-38
The evangelist mentioned John's imprisonment before Christ's being baptized, though it was nearly a year after it, because he would finish the story of John's ministry, and then introduce that of Christ. Now here we have,
One difficulty occurs between Abraham and Noah, which gives us some perplexity, v. 35, 36. Sala is said to be the son of Cainan, and he the son of Arphaxad, whereas Sala was the son of Arphaxad (Gen. 10:24; 11:12), and there is no such man as Cainan found there. But, as to that, it is sufficient to say that the Seventy Interpreters, who, before our Saviour's time, translated the Old Testament into Greek, for reasons best known to themselves inserted that Cainan; and St. Luke, writing among the Hellenist Jews, was obliged to make use of that translation, and therefore to take it as he found it.
The genealogy concludes with this, who was the son of Adam, the son of God.