Buried in the genealogy of Jesus in Matthew chapter one is a gospel treasure. That treasure is five women. The Gospels include two genealogies of Jesus - Luke 3:23–38 and Matthew 1:1–17. Luke’s version traces our Lord back to Adam, placing him over the family of mankind. Matthew’s list establishes Jesus as heir to the Davidic dynasty. But another key difference between the two is that Matthew’s list, unlike most such lists in the first century, includes five women. Their inclusion in the list is notable because it’s a patrilineal genealogy — a record of fathers and sons. Their inclusion is also notable because four of them were among the most notorious women in biblical history. In a family tree that traces only the male line, every deviation from this rule must be very significant.
We may call this “the forgotten chapter of the Christmas story.” We routinely skip this list and other records of genealogies in the scriptures in order to get to the “good stuff.” But the Jews of the first century would be quite surprised by our attitude. To them the genealogy would have been an absolutely essential setting for the story of Jesus’ birth.
The Jews routinely paid close attention to questions of genealogy. For instance, whenever land was bought or sold, the genealogical records were consulted to insure that land belonging to one tribe was not being sold to members of another tribe—and thus destroying the integrity of the ancient tribal boundaries. You couldn’t just put the money down and take the deed. You also had to prove that your ancestors came from the same tribe.
Genealogy was also crucial in determining the priesthood. The law specified that the priests must come from the tribe of Levi. Genealogy also helped determine the line of heirship to the throne. This helps explain why Ezra 2 and Nehemiah 7 contain lengthy listings of the various people returning from captivity. As the Jews re-established themselves in Israel, it was crucial that they know which families had historically held which positions in the nation.
But that same principle applies directly to the Christmas story. “In those days Caesar Augustus issued a decree that a census should be taken of the entire Roman world … And everyone went to his own town to register.” (Luke 2:1, 3) That meant that each man must return to his ancestral hometown—the town from which his family had originally come. But the only way you could be sure about your ancestral hometown was to know your genealogy.
Which is why Mary and Joseph had to travel from Nazareth to Bethlehem in the ninth month of her pregnancy. They had to make that long and dangerous journey because Bethlehem was Joseph’s ancestral hometown—a fact they knew from studying their genealogy.
Matthew begins his gospel with the genealogy of “Jesus the Messiah, the son of David, the son of Abraham,” and then goes on to list 42 men in Jesus’ family. These names are tied to the different stages in Israel’s history, and they all culminate with Jesus, the Christ, Immanuel.
Is this genealogy with its three groups of fourteen — clearly stylized — something more than an archaic ritual? Jesus' family tree (abbreviated by three kings in order to preserve the rhythm of the three fourteens) is here presented by Matthew in such a way that it emphatically repeats the name of David and Jesus Christ is the "son of David" - the family tree is meant to prove this. He is the one about whom Isaiah uttered this strange warning: "Hear then, O house of David! Is it too little for you to weary men, that you weary my God also? Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel." Isaiah 7:14.
All of these women share something in common: disgrace. These women either committed or suffered disgrace. They had tainted reputations. They likely would have endured the contempt of others. And all four would have struggled with very painful, even sordid memories.
And here’s the thing. Most of us want to conceal the more disgraceful events and people in our families. But not Jesus. He goes out of his way here to draw attention to these women whose very names call to mind scandalous things. Why? I think to remind us, before Matthew even begins the story of His birth, the reason for His coming.
Even in the genealogies God weaves his grace. He loves to redeem sinners. He loves to produce something beautiful out of sordid family backgrounds He loves to reconcile his enemies. He loves to make all things work together for good for those who love him and are called according to his purpose (Romans 8:28).
Each of these women are beautiful Old Covenant illustrations of what God would later say to Peter when clarifying that his grace is extended to all peoples: “What God has made clean, do not call common” (Acts 10:15).
And that’s His word to you and me. The amazingly good news of Christmas is that Jesus came to make notorious unclean sinners like us — people with disgraceful pasts who believe in His name (John 1:12) — clean and righteous.
Why did Matthew include these women in all male timeline? Matthew intended his readers to think of something other than sexual scandal when they heard the names Tamar (v. 3), Rehab (v. 5), Ruth (v. 5), “the wife of Uriah” (v. 7), and Mary (v. 16). So what did Matthew’s readers hear?
The first four women named in Jesus' genealogy—Tamar, Rehab, Ruth, and “the wife of Uriah”— were, in fact, gentiles. And while the fifth woman, Mary, was Jewish, she couldn’t be gentile, because Jesus was the biological son of Mary alone, not of Joseph’s lineage. Matthew could have chosen those with whom his readers were most familiar—Sarah, Rebecca, or Leah, for example. But this was not his point. Indeed, the message of the women in Jesus' genealogy is this: Jesus is the all-inclusive Messiah for all the earth’s peoples, not only to the Jew, but also to the gentile.
We go a little further and consider the overall argument of Matthew’s Gospel, and it’s this: Jesus is King. With the first four, Matthew demonstrated that Jesus is the fulfillment of God’s promise to Abraham that through the Messiah all nations of the earth would be blessed (Gen. 22:18). And by including Mary, Matthew demonstrated that Jesus Christ is the promised son of the Davidic line.
For Jesus to be the all-inclusive Jew-Gentile Messiah, Mary had to be Jewish, but Jesus also had to have Gentiles in his pedigree.
Matthew could not have made the case for gentile inclusion—which was of prime importance to his argument—with any of the men, because the Messiah had to be from the male bloodline going back to Abraham, meaning all the men had to be descendants of Abraham. So the only way to include Gentiles in Jesus royal pedigree was to include his Gentile women ancestors.
In this study we shall be focusing only on one of these ladies. Subsequent studies will focus on each of the others.
But how do we know Tamar, Rehab, Ruth, and “the wife of Uriah,” as Matthew calls her, were actually all gentiles?
We begin with the first two women, who were Canaanites. Of Tamar, the biblical text says simply that Judah got her as a wife for his son, Er (Gen. 38:6). So nothing in Genesis would indicate that Tamar was a gentile. But Philo, a Jew who lived at the time of Matthew, wrote this about her: “Tamar was a woman from Syria -Palestine who had been bred up in her own native city, which was devoted to the worship of many gods, being full of statues, and images, and, in short, of idols of every kind and description. But when she, emerging, as it were, out of profound darkness, was able to see a slight beam of truth, she then, at the risk of her life, exerted all her energies to arrive at piety…living for the service of and in constant supplication to the one true God” (Virt. 220–22). To Philo’s readers, and to those of his contemporary, Matthew, “Syria Palestina” was unequivocally gentile- so Tamar was a Canaanite.
As for the second woman, Rehab—she was from Jericho (see Josh. 2), the first of the Canaanite cities conquered with God’s help in the Promised Land.
And the third woman was Ruth. The text makes clear that she was a Moabitess (Ruth 1:4), so definitely a gentile.
That leaves the “wife of Uriah.” Now, notice that Matthew avoids identifying her by name, even though readers know he’s talking about Bathsheba. Bathsheba was first married to Uriah the Hittite. And Matthew’s readers definitely would have known him by this title. So if Matthew wanted to emphasize the Gentile-ness of Bathsheba, what better way than by reminding readers, using a sort-of shorthand, that her first husband was “the” Hittite? By the time Bathsheba bore Solomon, she was David's wife. But by reminding readers of Uriah, her first husband, Matthew stresses Bathsheba's origins.
Now, what was so significant about Canaanites and Hittites - these two groups “were among the seven peoples of the land of Canaan whom God had promised to drive out and Israel had been commanded to annihilate (Exod. 23:23, 28; 33:2; 34:11; Deut. 7:1; 20:17; Josh. 3:10; 1 Kgs. 9:20–21; Ezra 9:10). Canaanites and Hittites were Gentiles. And Christ is both descendant and lord of them, too.
Four unlikely women in Jesus’ family tree: what does that mean to us? When we examine this list in context of Matthew’s gospel and the history of Israel, a few things stand out as worthy of remembrance:
1. God’s plan will be carried out. These women represent what might be the ugly skeletons in the list. But God kept his promises to Abraham and David: The Messiah came through their lines.
2.God’s plan isn’t contingent on our righteousness. Ruth worshiped other gods, Tamar seduced her father-in-law, and Rehab was a prostitute, but these facts don’t derail God. And this principle extends beyond the women in this list: Abraham, Isaac, Jacob , Judah, David, Solomon, Manasseh, Amon—these men have plenty of biblically documented mistakes, too.
3. Right from the start, Jesus is identified with us. He’s at the end of a long line of sinful people, and this is our introduction to Him in the New Testament. He’s our king, and He’s not ashamed to be counted among us.
Knowing these truths helps me appreciate Jesus’ coming to earth even more
Let us look briefly into the lives of the four ladies. This study will touch on the life of Tamar as even a brief look into all four ladies will be too long. Subsequent studies will touch on each of the others.
The first is Tamah. Her story is told in Genesis 38..
And it came about at that time, that Judah departed from his brothers, and visited a certain Adullamite, whose name was Hirah. And Judah saw there a daughter of a certain Canaanite whose name was Shua; and he took her and went in to her. So she conceived and bore a son and he named him Er. Then she conceived again and bore a son and named him Onan.
And she bore still another son and named him Shelah; and it was at Chezib that she bore him. Now Judah took a wife for Er his first-born, and her name was Tamar. But Er, Judah’s first-born, was evil in the sight of the LORD, so the LORD took his life. Then Judah said to Onan, “Go in to your brother’s wife, and perform your duty as a brother-in-law to her, and raise up offspring for your brother.” And Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so it came about that when he went in to his brother’s wife, he wasted his seed on the ground, in order not to give offspring to his brother.
But what he did was displeasing in the sight of the LORD; so He took his life also. Then Judah said to his daughter-in-law Tamar, “Remain a widow in your father’s house until my son Shelah grows up”; for he thought, “I am afraid that he too may die like his brothers.” So Tamar went and lived in her father’s house - Gen. 38:1-11.
The sale of Joseph was only the “beginning of woes” for his father Israel. Directly on the heels of this sin flow the events of chapter 38. Unity among the sons of Israel was never a significant force. The selling of Joseph was only one indication of this, and even here, the brothers were not of one mind about it. But now Judah has chosen to leave his brothers and his father for the “greener grass on the other side of the fence ”- namely fellowship and union with the Canaanites.
Judah’s troubles began with an association with Hirah, an Adullamite. The events of the chapter as a whole inform us that Hirah was a close friend and a very poor influence on Judah. Wherever Hirah is mentioned there is trouble in store for Judah. While with Hirah at Adullam, Judah saw a certain Canaanite woman whose name is never given. She is only referred to as “Shua’s daughter” (verse 2,12). I take it from the fact that stress is laid on Judah’s seeing this woman (“and Judah saw there,” verse 2) that her outward appearance may have been his only consideration in taking her as a wife. Since this seems to have been influential in Jacob’s selection of a wife, we need not be surprised at this. It was, then, a purely physical choice. Certainly no spiritual considerations were taken into account.
Three sons were born from this union of Judah and the Canaanite woman: Er, Onan, and Shelah. For the first son, Tamar was acquired for a wife. We saw earlier that Tamar was a Canaanite. Er, however, was so evil that God took his life. His sins are not detailed, for they are irrelevant to the point of the passage. Onan was then instructed by Judah to marry Tamar and raise up seed to his brother. Since the headship of the family (the birthright) normally went to the firstborn, this was a necessary act.
We may be somewhat taken back by this early reference to what is later known as “levirate marriage.” Centuries later Moses commanded it as recorded in the book of Deuteronomy in 25:5-10
Onan knew that the offspring from his union with Tamar would only further the cause of his deceased brother rather than his own. Consequently he was not willing to have any children by her. To prevent Tamar from conceiving, Onan “spilled his seed on the ground” (verse 9). And God took the life of this man for his wickedness .
We are led to infer from the story that Judah never knew why children had not been conceived, for only Tamar would have known the cause. From Judah’s biased perspective it was Tamar who must be the problem, and this prompted him to withhold his last son.
Once Onan was dead, Judah became very reluctant to give his youngest (and last) son to Tamar. It never seemed to occur to him that it was his sons who were the problem, not Tamar. Probably Shelah was too young at first to assume the role of husband and father, but more than enough time elapsed to solve this problem. Finally Tamar was convinced that Judah had no intention of giving Shelah ,Judah's son to her. If she were to bear children to carry on the name of her first husband, she must force the issue, she concluded.
Sufficient time had passed for Shelah to grow up and take Tamar as a wife to raise up children to Er, the eldest brother. But while Tamar was officially regarded as the wife of Shelah, the marriage was never consummated, for Judah had never given Shelah to Tamar.
Now after a considerable time Shua’s daughter, the wife of Judah, died; and when the time of mourning was ended, Judah went up to his sheep-shearers at Timnah, he and his friend Hirah the Adullamite (38:12-19) News of this reached Tamar and signaled her to set into action a plan to provide a son to carry on the name of her first husband. Since Judah was unwilling to risk the loss of his last and only living son, Tamar determined to force the matter, becoming pregnant by Judah. Judah was wrong in withholding Shelah, but so was Tamar by taking these matters into her own hands.
Visualize a group of hard-working shepherds finishing an exhausting, hot, and thirsty week among the sheep, leaving the fields after having completed this annual task. Suddenly one calls out to the others, “It’s fun time ” With a girl in one arm and a bottle of liquor in the other, the celebration begins. Tamar knew well that this was the kind of thing that took place at sheep-shearing season.
This was the moral atmosphere at that time in Canaan and Tamar knew Judah very well. Moral purity does not seem to be one of his virtues. There is little doubt that this wasn’t Judah’s first encounter with a prostitute. He does not show evidence of the simplicity of one who is new at this sort of thing. He handled the arrangements like an experienced man of the world. Tamar was convinced that if she could only look like a prostitute, Judah would take things from there and that her purposes would be realized.
With all the skills of one who was worldly wise, Judah negotiated terms acceptable to both parties. It was probably common practice to ask for some kind of pledge since little could be done to force the “client” to pay after the event. Judah was therefore not taken back by Tamar’s insistence that some guarantee be given. Not that Tamar had any interest in payment. She wanted only to become pregnant by Judah. But the pledge that was given would serve to prove at a later time that Judah was the father of the child that was conceived from this union.
The seal, cord, and staff were not items purchased from mass-produced stock. Each had distinctive characteristics which were peculiar to the owner. The seal was the ancient cylinder seal used in the making of contracts. When a contract was made, hot wax was put on the document and the seal was rolled over it, leaving the impression of the owner of the seal. Judah’s seal was one of a kind, as were those of others. He would therefore immediately recognize it as his own. The same was true of the staff. Possession of these gave Tamar proof of the identity of the father of her child when he was born.
When this encounter ended Judah and Tamar went their separate ways. Judah never knew the identity of this “prostitute,” and Tamar went back to her normal routine, living as a widow in her father’s house. Normally such an affair would have been quickly forgotten, but several events occurred which made this immoral interlude a nightmare that Judah would never be able to put out of his mind.
When Judah sent the kid by his friend the Adullamite, to receive the pledge from the woman’s hand, he did not find her. And he asked the men of her place, saying, “Where is the temple prostitute who was by the road at Enaim?” But they said, “There has been no temple prostitute here.” So he returned to Judah, and said, “I did not find her; and furthermore, the men of the place said, ‘There has been no temple prostitute here.’” Then Judah said, “Let her keep them, lest we become a laughingstock. After all, I sent this kid, but you did not find her.” Now it was about three months later that Judah was informed, “Your daughter-in-law Tamar has played the harlot, and behold, she is also with child by harlotry.” Then Judah said, “Bring her out and let her be burned!” It was while she was being brought out that she sent to her father-in-law, saying, “I am with child by the man to whom these things belong.” And she said, “Please examine and see, whose signet ring and cords and staff are these?” And Judah recognized them, and said, “She is more righteous than I, inasmuch as I did not give her to my son Shelah.” And he did not have relations with her again (Genesis 38:20-26).
Hirah was sent to pay the prostitute and retrieve the pledge which Judah had given her. A subtle but significant change of words occurs here, which is indicative of a serious flaw in Judah’s character. Judah thought that the woman in the gateway of Enaim was a mere prostitute (verse 15, a harlot). But when Hirah searched for her he asked for the whereabouts of the “temple prostitute” (verses 21, 22). The religion of the Canaanites was so corrupt that prostitution was a part of their worship of the god of fertility. Judah, in his spiritual and moral dullness, was ignorant of such distinctions. To him it was merely an affair, but to the Canaanites it was an act of worship. Immorality would almost invariably lead to idolatry.
As one month, then two, and nearly three passed by without incident, Judah may have begun to breathe a little easier. It seemed as though he had gotten off easy. The woman had not appeared again, nor was there any sign of his personal pledge. It never entered his mind that the matter would end up as it did.
One day Judah was informed that Tamar was pregnant. This was not mere fornication, but it was adultery, for Tamar was pledged to marry Judah’s third son, Shelah. Judah’s righteous indignation must have been awesome. She must be burned! This was an unusually severe punishment, even more than the Law required. The usual punishment prescribed by the Law of Moses was stoning (Deuteronomy 22:20-24). In cases of unusual wickedness, there was punishment by burning (Leviticus 20:14; 21:9). Why, then, was Judah demanding such treatment for his daughter-in-law? It may have been a sub-conscious overcompensation for his own immorality. Often we attempt to cover up our own sinfulness by a severity in our response to the sins of others.
Tamar’s response to the situation was incredibly subdued and submissive. Frankly, I would have shouted that Judah was the father of this child from the housetops. I would have sought to maximize his embarrassment. What an opportunity to capitalize on the situation and find satisfaction for the years of delay and deceit in keeping Shelah from her. But she, it would seem, privately presented the evidence to Judah and politely urged him to carefully consider it. She made no condemning accusations but only submitted the seal, the cord, and the staff to Judah.
What a shock this must have been to Judah. It never occurred to him that he was the guilty party who should suffer the penalty he had pronounced with his own lips. Judah, the forefather of the Messiah and the great grandson of Abraham, had to say of this woman, “She is more righteous than I”- verse 26 in that she acted so as to procure a son that was rightfully hers, while Judah refused to give her Shelah as he had promised. As to his act of immorality, Judah had no comment. What a contrast to his response to the report of Tamar’s “harlotry.”
Judah may have had some kind of turnabout here, for he did not again have any physical relations with Tamar. Also, the next time we read of him he is again back with his brothers and father. Some kind of spiritual renewal must have taken place.
And it came about at the time she was giving birth, that behold, there were twins in her womb. Moreover, it took place while she was giving birth, one put out a hand, and the midwife took and tied a scarlet thread on his hand, saying, “This one came out first.” But it came about as he drew back his hand, that behold his brother came out. Then she said, “What a breach you have made for yourself!” So he was named Perez. And afterward his brother came out who had the scarlet thread on his hand; and he was named Zerah (Genesis 38:27-30).
The closing paragraph of the chapter describes the birth of the twins that resulted from the union of Judah and Tamar. Since the twin that was first to emerge from the womb traditionally possessed the rights of the firstborn, some kind of identifying mark was placed on the first to issue from the womb. When one of the boys thrust out a hand, a scarlet thread was tied about it, assuming that he would shortly come forth. The hand was withdrawn, however, and the firstborn was the other boy. This firstborn was named Perez, while the next son, the one with the scarlet thread, was named Zerah. As later genealogies will prove, this firstborn son, Perez, was to be the son of Judah who would carry on the messianic line until the time of David, and ultimately, of Jesus (cf. Ruth 4:12; Matthew 1:3).
Historically, this chapter had much to teach the ancient Israelites. To begin with, this event underscores the necessity of a sojourn in Egypt. Spiritual purity was essential for the purposes of God to be realized. Judah, the son through whom the Messiah would be born (Genesis 49:8-12), was so carnal that he was willing to marry a Canaanite woman, to have a heathen for his closest companion, and to enter into an illicit relationship with a cult prostitute. While Joseph flees Potiphar’s wife so as not to be caught in adultery, Judah embraces two woman both Canaanites and the opportunity they offered - his wife and his daughter-in-law. Something drastic had to be done, and the exile in Egypt was God’s remedy. There, living among a people who detested Hebrew shepherds (43:32; 46:34), even if the Hebrews were willing to inter-mingle and intermarry with these people, the Egyptians would not even consider such a thing. Racial bigotry, if not religious piety, would keep the people of God a separate people. While the sojourn in Egypt was in many respects a bitter experience, it was a gracious act on the part of God. Those Israelites who had gone through the exodus experience could begin to sense this as they read this account.
No Israelite could take this record seriously without a deep sense of humility. Israel’s “roots,” if you will pardon me for saying so, were rotten. They could not look back upon their ancestry with any feelings of pride. There were too many skeletons in the closet for that. Instead, they must acknowledge that whatever good had come to Israel was the result of grace alone.
The LORD did not set His love on you nor choose you because you were more in number than any of the peoples, for you were the fewest of all peoples, but because the LORD loved you and kept the oath which He swore to your forefathers, the LORD brought you out by a might hand, and redeemed you from the house of slavery, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt (Deuteronomy 7:7-8).
The Bible is silent about Tamar's genealogy. As far as Judah was concerned, his promise to Tamar had been forgotten. But Tamar refused to be forgotten. She does the unthinkable. If her father-in-law wouldn't give her his son to raise up an heir for her dead husband, she would see to it that she had that heir, in her own way. She disguised herself as a prostitute and seduced Judah. Nine months later she bore twins as a result of this union. One of those twins, Peraz is listed in the Messianic line.
Now this was a questionable relationship, to put it mildly. Was this God's will? Definitely no. I'm sure God would have preferred to have Judah follow Hebrew law by giving Shelah to wed Tamar, which would have resulted in perpetuating an heir to the Messianic throne. While Judah chose to shirk his duty to provide male heirs to keep the messianic promise alive, Tamar would not let him. Tamar refused to be forgotten. She refused to be shoved aside. Although there is no evidence that Tamar worshiped Israel's God, it is assumed that she must have had known the significance of Judah's family line and she was determined to provide a male heir. Though she resorted to methods we cannot condone, God used this situation for His own good purpose.
We may be shocked when we see both Judah and Tamar listed in the genealogy of Jesus Christ, but we cannot presume to question God's ways. Perhaps their heritage played a part in their being chosen to be in the line of the Messiah. Judah was a Jew. Tamar was a gentile. Perhaps their union was a foreshadowing of the fact that both Jews and Gentiles were to share in the blessings of the Gospel.
Tamar’s sons fulfill the promise that “though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me, one who will be ruler over Israel” (Micah 5:2), This prophecy speaks of the promised Messiah.
This is the message of Christmas - God came down in the form of man to reconcile both Jew and Gentile to Him.
