[See comments on Lu 3:28]<\/span><\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n 1) “Which was the son of Melea,” <\/strong>(tou Melea) “The heir-son of Melea,” which means “fulness.”<\/p>\n 2) “Which was the son of Menan,” <\/strong>(tou Menna) “The heir-son of Menna,” about whom nothing further is known, except he was in our Lord’s genealogy through Mary’s lineage, back to David and Adam.<\/p>\n 3) “Which was the son of Mattha,” <\/strong>(tou Mattatha) “The heir-son of Mattatha,” Gk. form of the word Mattaniah, meaning “gift of Jehovah,” 2Ki 24:17<\/span>.<\/p>\n 4) “Which was the son of Nathan,” <\/strong>(tou Natham) “The heir-son of Nathan,” which means “a gift”, a prophet of God, 2Sa 7:1-29<\/span>.<\/p>\n 5) “Which was the son of David,” <\/strong>(tou David) “The heir-son of David,” the sweet singer of Israel. The name means “beloved”, King of Israel, and son of Jesse.<\/p>\n 31 Which was the son<\/em> of Melea, which was the son<\/em> of Menan, which was the son<\/em> of Mattatha, which was the son<\/em> of Nathan, which was the son<\/em> of David,<\/p>\n<\/p>\n 32 Which was the son<\/em> of Jesse, which was the son<\/em> of Obed, which was the son<\/em> of Booz, which was the son<\/em> of Salmon, which was the son<\/em> of Naasson,<\/p>\n<\/p>\n 33 Which was the son<\/em> of Aminadab, which was the son<\/em> of Aram, which was the son<\/em> of Esrom, which was the son<\/em> of Phares, which was the son<\/em> of Juda,<\/p>\n<\/p>\n 34 Which was the son<\/em> of Jacob, which was the son<\/em> of Isaac, which was the son<\/em> of Abraham, which was the son<\/em> of Thara, which was the son<\/em> of Nachor, <\/p>\n<\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n Ver. 34. Which was the son of Thara<\/strong> ] So there are reckoned ten generations from Abraham to Noah. And again, ten from Noah to Adam. <\/p>\n 31. <\/strong> <\/strong> ] See 2Sa 5:14<\/span> ; Chron. Luk 3:5<\/span> : Zec 12:12<\/span> .<\/p>\n Nathan. This is the natural line through Nathan. In Mat 1:6, the regal line is shown through Solomon. Thus both lines became united in Joseph; and thus the Lord being raised from the dead is the one and only heir to the throne of David. For the two lines see App-99. <\/p>\n 31. ] See 2Sa 5:14; Chron. Luk 3:5 : Zec 12:12.<\/p>\n Luk 3:31. , Nathan) [Luke substitutes him for Solomon, who is put down by Matthew here in this series, because that Mary drew her descent from Nathan, or else because Joseph derived his genealogy alike from Solomon and from Nathan; for it was a common practice of the Jews to adopt some one of their nearest relatives in the place of a son.-Harm., p. 148] This Nathan, the son of David, is a man very memorable. Zec 12:12 [where in the future repentance of the Jews, the families of the house of David, and those of the house of Nathan mourn apart]. Sohar Num. on Isa 40:8, Cheph Zibah wife of Nathan son of David is mother of the Messiah. Schttgen on this passage.<\/p>\n of Nathan: 2Sa 5:14, 1Ch 3:5, 1Ch 14:4, Zec 12:12 <\/p>\n Reciprocal: Rth 4:22 – David 1Sa 17:12 – David<\/p>\n Luk 3:31. Nathan. Comp. 2Sa 5:14; 1Ch 3:5; Zec 12:12. On the genealogy from David back to Adam, comp. 1 Chronicles 1, 2<\/p>\n Which was [the son] of Melea, which was [the son] of Menan, which was [the son] of Mattatha, which was [the son] of Nathan, which was [the son] of David, [See comments on Lu 3:28] Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible 1) “Which was the son of Melea,” (tou Melea) “The heir-son of … Continue reading “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Luke 3:31”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-25040","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25040","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=25040"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25040\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=25040"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=25040"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=25040"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Greek Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"