On the other hand, if the genealogy in Matthew is taken seriously, then Jesus has as an ancestor Jeconiah (Matthew 1:12), of whom the prophet Jeremiah said, “Write this man down as childless, a man who will not prosper in his days, for no man of his descendants will prosper sitting on the throne of David or ruling again in Judah.” (Jeremiah 22:30) The genealogy in Luke suffers from the same problem, since it includes Shealtiel and Zerubbabel, both of whom were descendants of Jeconiah.
I personally am not convinced this ‘Jeconiah’ problem EVEN EXISTS, and here’s why:
I don’t think the prophecy in Jeremiah is referring to Jeconiah’s descendants FOR ALL TIME. The context of the passage seems to limit the scope to just his immediate descendants:
The phrase ‘in his lifetime’ (lit. “in his days”- yom) focuses the passage on the immediate future;
the “for” word connects the ‘no man of his descendants’ with the ‘in his lifetime’–the strong casual relationship between not-prospering-now and his descendants is strong evidence for an immediate future context;
the ‘again’ word ('od) is not the “big” FOREVER word: ad-olam or le-olam.
Immediately after this passage, Jeremiah relays a promise by Yahweh to raise up ‘a righteous branch to David’ --a promise of the continuing line of David! Could Jeremiah have been so blind as to not notice such a contradiction (if the preceding passage referred to the ‘end of the Davidic line’?!) It looks much more likely that this is a deposing of Jeconiah, and a promise of a better king from the stock of David (maybe even from non-immediate/non-physical descendants of Jeconiah?).
This his-generation-only-curse view is pointed out by commentators as well:
“The image in v 30 shifts to that of a scribe, whether a census taker (as Holladay suggests) or land register (as Carroll suggests) or a scribe tallying prisoners of war to be taken to Babylon. The official in charge says of Jehoiachin, “Write (register) this man, ‘Stripped’ (perhaps dishonored, disgraced) or ‘Childless.’” A register of those taken captive would logically include the head of the family followed by a listing of dependents. It might also include comments such as disgraced, banished (as LXX implies), or stripped (of power). Such is to remain the condition of Jehoiachin. The fact that children are apparently included in v 28, and sons are listed in 1 Chr 3:17–18, should not diminish the thrust of the oracle. The sense of “childless” or “stripped” is that Jehoiachin will have no descendant ruling upon the throne of David. The word tslach occurs twice in this verse. Often the word is translated with the sense of “prosper.” However, here a better sense seems to be that of “succeed.” No man will succeed during Jehoiachin’s days; indeed none will succeed. The implication might be that of prosperity: that no man would prosper during his days. But the full intent of that phrase is shown in the two parallel lines, “none sitting on the throne of David, nor ruling again in Judah.” Jehoiachin will have no descendant to advance or succeed to the throne.” [Craigie, P. C. (2002). Vol. 26: Word Biblical Commentary : Jeremiah 1-25. ]
So, if the prophecy of Jeconiah is NOT to be extended past his immediate descendants, as I have just argued, then Jim’s problem evaporates.
EVEN IF the passage IS a longer-range prediction, the line THROUGH Jeconiah only comes to Joseph and not to Mary. The gene-stream stops physically at Joseph through the virgin birth. Therefore, Jeconiah, who is only mentioned in Matthew (the legal line to Joseph) doesn’t ‘pass on the blood’ (assuming ‘descendants’ referred to bloodline, of course).
But many commentators understand the curse to have been rescinded by God in Haggai anyway:
“Jehoiachin’s name appears in Matthew’s genealogy of Jesus Christ (1:11, 12), and some contend this contradicts Jeremiah’s oracle of judgment against the king’s descendants (Jer 22:30). Yet it is possible to understand Haggai’s blessing of Zerubabbel (2:20–24) as the rescission of Jeremiah’s curse and the reinstatement of Jehoiachin’s line on the Davidic (and ultimately Messianic) throne (cf. Is 56:3–5).” [Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible.].
Rabbinic tradition generally agrees with this as well:
“for no man of his seed shall prosper -In this, too, no man of his seed shall prosper, namely that no one will occupy the throne of David nor rule in Judah. Although we find that Zerubbabel, his great grandson, did rule over Judah upon the return of the exiles, the Rabbis (Pesikta /'Rav Kahana p. 163a) state that this : ‘was because Jehoiachin repented in prison. They state further: Repentance is great, for it nullifies a person’s sentence, as it is stated: inscribe this man childless.’ But since he repented, his sentence was revoked and turned to the good, and he said to him, “I will take you, Zerubbabel, and I will make you a signet” (Haggai 2:23). They state further: Said Rabbi Johanan: Exile expiates all sins, as it is said: Inscribe this man childless,” and after he was exiled, it IS written: '(I Chron. 3:17) And the sons of Jeconiah, Assir, Shealtiel his son–Redak" [Judaica Books of the Prophets, in loc]
[Notice how this parallels the known case of Manasseh, the evil Davidic king who was exiled by Assyria to its southern province in Babylon, and who then repented and was restored to rulership in Judah–2 Chron 33.10-13.]
This highly-probable understanding completely removes any problem with Jeconiah in anyone’s geneaology. And thus we do not really even NEED any ‘additional’ lineage ‘around him’, to establish legitimate Davidic-dynastic heritage. [We will discuss the ‘why then did Luke use Nathan?’ issue below, at the END of the article.]
Now the issue about Shealtiel and Zerubbabel I find intriguing. The argument Jim makes here is that THEY are descendants of the ‘bad Jeconiah’ and THEY show up in BOTH the legal AND the physical lineages of Jesus. And, if the prophecy in Jeremiah is taken to mean a long-range restriction (which I/many others do NOT believe is the case, see above), then we clearly have a problem in the Lukan, physical/gene-stream lineage of Jesus.
christian-thinktank.com/fabprof4.html