Demonstrable Errors in Modern Versions Part 3: Matthew 1:8–10

One of the central truths of Christianity is the incarnation of Jesus Christ. Not simply the fact of God the Son entering into humanity to redeem His elect, but the fact that the child born, the God-man, was in fact the Davidic Messiah prophesied to come throughout the Old Testament. Of this truth the Scriptures speak abundantly:

Acts 2:29–31 Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day. (30) Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; (31) He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.

Jesus Christ is the “rod out of the stem of Jesse” and the “root of David” prophesied to come:

Isaiah 11:1 AND there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots

Jeremiah 23:5 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD , that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth.

Jeremiah 33:15 In those days, and at that time, will I cause the Branch of righteousness to grow up unto David; and he shall execute judgment and righteousness in the land.

Such a truth is vital to the Christian faith. Jesus Christ’s true humanity and legal right to the throne of David is just as fundamental as the truth of His deity. If Jesus Christ is not a true descendent of David according to the flesh, then God’s promises are in vain:

2 Samuel 7:12–17 And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom. (13) He shall build an house for my name, and I will stablish the throne of his kingdom for ever. (14) I will be his father, and he shall be my son. If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men: (15) But my mercy shall not depart away from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away before thee. (16) And thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before thee: thy throne shall be established for ever. (17) According to all these words, and according to all this vision, so did Nathan speak unto David.

The Apostles were clear that Jesus Christ was made of the seed of David according to the flesh:

Romans 1:3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh

This truth is also confessed by every Reformed believer, as the Belgic Confession Article 18 teaches:

Therefore we confess (in opposition to the heresy of the Anabaptists, who deny that Christ assumed human flesh of his mother) that Christ is become a partaker of the flesh and blood of the children; that he is a fruit of the loins of David after the flesh; made of the seed of David according to the flesh; a fruit of the womb of the Virgin Mary, made of a woman, a branch of David; a shoot of the root of Jesse; sprung from the tribe of Judah; descended from the Jews according to the flesh; of the seed of Abraham, since he took on him the seed of Abraham, and became like unto his brethren in all things, sin excepted, so that in truth he is our Immanuel, that is to say, God with us.

In confessing this great truth concerning the descent of our Lord from the Davidic line, both biologically (from Mary) and legally (from Joseph), we have the express testimony of Matthew and Luke. The Holy Ghost saw fit to include our Lord’s genealogies from both Joseph and Mary in order to fully establish the legitimacy of His messiahship and claim to the throne of David. The resurrection of Christ was a vindication of this truth as He now sits enthroned in heaven. Accordingly, our trusted King James Bible gives us this genealogy in Matthew chapter 1. I will not post the whole thing here since it is not needful for the purposes of this article. However, we will be looking at three verses from the first chapter of Matthew:

Matthew 1:8–10 And Asa begat Josaphat; and Josaphat begat Joram; and Joram begat Ozias; (9) And Ozias begat Joatham; and Joatham begat Achaz; and Achaz begat Ezekias; (10) And Ezekias begat Manasses; and Manasses begat Amon; and Amon begat Josias

Most modern versions are thankfully in agreement with the KJB and the Greek text underlying it. However, the ESV & NRSV both contain a grievous error in this passage. I will cite from the ESV as we have been doing thus far in this series:

Matthew 1:8–10 and Asaph the father of Jehoshaphat, and Jehoshaphat the father of Joram, and Joram the father of Uzziah, (9) and Uzziah the father of Jotham, and Jotham the father of Ahaz, and Ahaz the father of Hezekiah, (10) and Hezekiah the father of Manasseh, and Manasseh the father of Amos, and Amos the father of Josiah

Astonishingly, the ESV has chosen to adopt a reading which totally obliterates the genealogy of Jesus Christ. Rather than correctly listing Asa & Amon, the ESV & NRSV both list Asaph and Amos as the forefathers of Jesus. Anyone familiar with their Old Testament will know that there are only two men named “Asaph” listed therein. The first was a Levite, the son of Berechiah (1 Chronicles 6:39) and an author of several of the Psalms (2 Chronicles 29:30; Psalm 50, Psalm 73–83). The second was a Jew who lived during the Babylonian exile, and lived long after the time of the Davidic kings.

Also the knowledgeable reader will be familiar with Amos, who was one of the minor prophets and has an entire book of the Bible named after him. Although living in Judah, he was not a part of the Davidic line, nor the son of a Davidic king.

So then, what on earth are these two names doing in our Lord’s genealogy in the ESV & NRSV? The apostate Bruce Metzger had the following appalling comment to make regarding this erroneous although ancient reading his Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament:

Metzger explicitly concedes that the readings “Asaph” and “Amos” are erroneous. Instead of adopting the correct reading, however, he simply theorizes that Matthew, who was inspired and moved by the Holy Ghost, consulted corrupted extra-biblical literature which gave the wrong reading. Such ought to be utterly unacceptable to any Reformed believer, and yet the ESV which contains this perversion of our Lord’s genealogy is used far and wide within most Reformed and Presbyterian congregations today. This is a perfect example of unbelieving scholarship. To the faithful Reformed Christian, who loves the Scriptures, “believing without any doubt, all things contained in them” (BCF Article 5), and confessing with all else who profess the true Reformed religion that we “reject with all our hearts, whatsoever doth not agree with this infallible rule” (BCF Article 7), this should be as plain as the sky is blue.

What Metzger and the heretical reconstructionists maintain about this text “doth not agree with this infallible rule” and ought to be vehemently opposed by every Reformed believer, especially by ministers of the Gospel whose job it is to preach and uphold the word of God faithfully. The Old Testament Hebrew Bible is clear that Asa and Amon are the Davidic kings intended, not Amos or Asaph, and Bruce Metzger even agreed with this, acknowledging that the erroneous misspellings only occur in later Greek witnesses.

Hopefully by this point in our series, the reader is beginning to get the point. But we are by no means finished. Stay tuned for more.