Jesus’ genealogy selects just enough ancestors (“begat” can mean “was the ancestor of”) to create three series of fourteen names > probably employing gematria (numerical value of the sum of the Hebrew consonants of a given word) on the name דוד (“David”), which equaled fourteen (ד = 4, ו = 6, ד = 4). This is important.
The first series climaxes with David, the second with the deportation to Babylon, a momentous turning point in Israelite history (2 Kings 25). All the names from “Abraham” to “Zerubbabel” appear in the OT. The patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Judah figure prominently in Gen. 12–50.
The other male names in 1:2–6a all correspond to 1 Chron. 2:3–15. “Solomon” through “Josiah” (1:6b–11) all appear in 1 Chron. 3:10–14, once we recognize that Azariah and Uzziah were the same people (2 Kings 15:1–2 with 2 Chron. 26:3).
“Jeconiah” (1:12) is a variant form of “Jehoiachin,” who with Shealtiel and Zerubbabel are mentioned in 1 Chron. 3:17–19. The rest of the names (from “Abiud” to “Jacob”) are otherwise unknown.
More interesting than the men are the women in Jesus’ genealogy. Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, and Bathsheba (“Uriah’s wife” [1:6]) were Gentiles but also women who were under suspicion, rightly or wrongly, of illicit sexual relations (Gen. 38; Josh. 2; Ruth 3; 2 Sam. 11).
Mary was not a Gentile, but she did experience the stigma of a conception out of wedlock, shrouded in suspicion among those who did not believe the story of a virgin birth.
So to answer the doubts raised by DGX37, one notes that Matthew takes his genealogy back no farther than Abraham (Luke goes back to Adam).
From Abraham to David the genealogy is much the same as in Luke, though, of course, the two arrange the names differently: Luke goes from son to father and Matthew from father to son.
The striking differences in the genealogies from David present a difficult problem. Some suggest that Matthew gives us the genealogy of Joseph (the legal father) and Luke that of Mary (the actual line).
I think this is unlikely, for genealogies were not reckoned through the mother (though, of course, we must reckon with the fact that we have no information about what would happen when there was no human father).
In any case, Luke speaks of “Joseph the son of Eli” (Luke 3:23), which certainly does not read as though he were giving Mary’s genealogy.
Another supposition is that there had been a levirate marriage when Eli died childlessly; Jacob, with the same mother but a different father, married the widow, and Joseph was his son. Some suggest this, but it lacks evidence.
I would suggest, that Matthew’s list represents the legal descendants of David, those who would actually have reigned had the kingdom continued, while Luke gives the descendants of David in the line to which Joseph belonged. But we have no way of being certain.
Does this mean “many things have been added, removed, or corrupted?”