The Seed of David

One of the requirements of being The Messiah was to be of the seed of David. It seems highly likely that this specifically meant a descendant though the male line.

Women Are Not Important

Why only the male line? Because women are not important.

• The Bible tells us Noah's name, and his three sons. But none of their wives gets her name recorded. Who they are is not important to the narrative.
• In Genesis 10, we read about Noah's descendant for the next few generations. Getting on for sixty men are named. Zero women.
• Genesis 35:17-18 relates how Rachel died in childbirth, but the midwife reassured her that she had had a son. Giving birth to a son was regarded as more important than surviving!
• Exodus 23:17 and 34:23, as well as Deuteronomy 16:16, has God demanding that all the males appear before him. As for the females, he is not interested.
• Leviticus 1:3 has God demanding a male sheep or goat in sacrifice; a female just will not do.
• Leviticus 12:2,5 tells us that a woman is unclean for 7 days after giving birth to a boy, but 14 if a girl. There are plenty of other verses about how women are unclean once a month.
• Numbers 3:15 has God asking for a census of the Levites - but only the males, the females do not matter.

Matthew's Genealogy

For this reason, Matthew is careful to present a genealogy in which each step is "the father of":

1 This is the genealogy[a] of Jesus the Messiah[b] the son of David, the son of Abraham:
2 Abraham was the father of Isaac,
Isaac the father of Jacob,
Jacob the father of Judah and his brothers,
3 Judah the father of Perez and Zerah, whose mother was Tamar,
Perez the father of Hezron,
Hezron the father of Ram,
4 Ram the father of Amminadab,
Amminadab the father of Nahshon,
Nahshon the father of Salmon,
5 Salmon the father of Boaz, whose mother was Rahab,
Boaz the father of Obed, whose mother was Ruth,
Obed the father of Jesse,
6 and Jesse the father of King David.
David was the father of Solomon, whose mother had been Uriah’s wife,
7 Solomon the father of Rehoboam,
Rehoboam the father of Abijah,
Abijah the father of Asa,
8 Asa the father of Jehoshaphat,
Jehoshaphat the father of Jehoram,
Jehoram the father of Uzziah,
9 Uzziah the father of Jotham,
Jotham the father of Ahaz,
Ahaz the father of Hezekiah,
10 Hezekiah the father of Manasseh,
Manasseh the father of Amon,
Amon the father of Josiah,
11 and Josiah the father of Jeconiah[c] and his brothers at the time of the exile to Babylon.
12 After the exile to Babylon:
Jeconiah was the father of Shealtiel,
Shealtiel the father of Zerubbabel,
13 Zerubbabel the father of Abihud,
Abihud the father of Eliakim,
Eliakim the father of Azor,
14 Azor the father of Zadok,
Zadok the father of Akim,
Akim the father of Elihud,
15 Elihud the father of Eleazar,
Eleazar the father of Matthan,
Matthan the father of Jacob,
16 and Jacob the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary, and Mary was the mother of Jesus who is called the Messiah.
17 Thus there were fourteen generations in all from Abraham to David, fourteen from David to the exile to Babylon, and fourteen from the exile to the Messiah.

Luke's Genealogy

Luke takes the reverse approach with "the son of", but again it is clear that it sons, not daughters, that are important.

Luke 3:23 Now Jesus himself was about thirty years old when he began his ministry. He was the son, so it was thought, of Joseph,
the son of Heli, 24 the son of Matthat,
the son of Levi, the son of Melki,
the son of Jannai, the son of Joseph,
25 the son of Mattathias, the son of Amos,
the son of Nahum, the son of Esli,
the son of Naggai, 26 the son of Maath,
the son of Mattathias, the son of Semein,
the son of Josek, the son of Joda,
27 the son of Joanan, the son of Rhesa,
the son of Zerubbabel, the son of Shealtiel,
the son of Neri, 28 the son of Melki,
the son of Addi, the son of Cosam,
the son of Elmadam, the son of Er,
29 the son of Joshua, the son of Eliezer,
the son of Jorim, the son of Matthat,
the son of Levi, 30 the son of Simeon,
the son of Judah, the son of Joseph,
the son of Jonam, the son of Eliakim,
31 the son of Melea, the son of Menna,
the son of Mattatha, the son of Nathan,
the son of David, 32 the son of Jesse,
the son of Obed, the son of Boaz,
the son of Salmon,[d] the son of Nahshon,
33 the son of Amminadab, the son of Ram,[e]
the son of Hezron, the son of Perez,
the son of Judah, 34 the son of Jacob,
the son of Isaac, the son of Abraham,
the son of Terah, the son of Nahor,
35 the son of Serug, the son of Reu,
the son of Peleg, the son of Eber,
the son of Shelah, 36 the son of Cainan,
the son of Arphaxad, the son of Shem,
the son of Noah, the son of Lamech,
37 the son of Methuselah, the son of Enoch,
the son of Jared, the son of Mahalalel,
the son of Kenan, 38 the son of Enosh,
the son of Seth, the son of Adam,
the son of God.

Many Christians like to pretend that Luke presents us with Mary's genealogy, but the reality is that Mary does not get a mention. Women are not relevant to genealogies.

But Judah Had A Queen!

All the kings of Judah were messiahs (all were anointed, all were considered the adopted sons of God). However, there was one queen who ruled Judah.

Athaliah was the daughter of King Ahab and Queen Jezebel of Israel, and she married Jehoram of Judah, to seal a treaty between Judah and Israel. When Jehoram died, he was succeeded by his son, Ahaziah.

2 Kings 8-12 relates how, after one year as king, Ahaziah visited Israel, where he, as well as the ruling family in Israel, were killed by Jehu (supposedly on God's orders). Jehu set himself up as Israel's new king, while Athaliah declared herself ruler of Judah. To secure her position, Athaliah murdered her family (what was left after Jehu had gone through them). However, she missed her grandson, Jehoash, who was just a year old. Six years later a rebellion captured and executed Athaliah, putting Jehoash on the throne.

During her six year ruled, Athaliah tried to establish worship of Baal in Judah.

Is this, then, a precedent for The Messiah? Athaliah was a woman, was not of the house of David, and was an idolatress too. The answer has to be an emphatic NO!

Note that Jehoash was a direct male line descendant of David through Athaliah's husband, so the line of kings of Judah continues with direct male line descendants of David.

What About Israel?

The Kingdom of Israel (the "Northern Kingdom") had several kings that were not of the House of David, such as Omri and Ahad. Should we assume that being of the line of David was not a requirement to being the messiah? Obviously not. The kingdom of Israel fell around 720 BCE, more than a hundred years before Judah (586 BCE), and that fall was attributed to a lack of worship of God (a succession of kings who did evil in God's eyes!).

This was not a precedent for the long-awaited messiah.

Josephus

Furthermore, we have the words of Josephus, who makes it clear in Antiquity of the Jews, Against Apion:

1.7 But what is the strongest argument of our exact management in this matter is what I am now going to say; that we have the names of our High priests from father to son set down in our records, for the interval of two thousand years. And if any of these have been transgressors of these rules, they are prohibited to present themselves at the altar, or to be partakers of any other of our purifications.

To be sure, this is about the priests, but the Messiah was likewise a religious concern, so would undoubtedly be similar.

By the way, we can read about what happens when a priest does not have a proper genealogy here:

Ezra 2:61 Of the sons of the priests: the sons of [x]Habaiah, the sons of Hakkoz, the sons of Barzillai, who took a wife from the daughters of Barzillai the Gileadite, and he was called by their name. 62 These searched among their ancestral registration, but they could not be located; therefore they were considered unclean and excluded from the priesthood. 63 The [y]governor said to them that they should not eat from the most holy things until a priest stood up with Urim and Thummim.

The event also recorded in Nehemiah 7:61-65.

Why different Genealogies?

Matthew and Luke present significantly different genealogies. Why might that be? The simple reason is that both are made up! However, it is interesting to see the different approaches.

It may be that both authors were aware of these verses:

Jeremiah 22:24 “As I live,” declares the Lord, “even if [g]Coniah the son of Jehoiakim king of Judah were a signet ring on My right hand, yet I would pull [h]you [i]off; ...

30 This is what the Lord says:

‘Write this man down as childless,

A man who will not prosper in his days;

For no man among his descendants will prosper

Sitting on the throne of David

Or ruling again in Judah.’”

Coniah the son of Jehoiakim is King Jeconiah, the last king of Judah, and these verses are about the fall of Judah to Babylon. The author is rationalising the captivity - the king was bad, so God had the Babylonians conquer them.

The author of Luke therefore devised a genealogy that avoids Jeconiah, given the curse that states no descendant of his will ever sit on the throne.

The author of Matthew, on the other hand, has read this:

Haggai 2:23 ‘On that day,’ declares the Lord of armies, ‘I will take you, Zerubbabel, son of Shealtiel, My servant,’ declares the Lord, ‘and I will make you like a [w]signet ring, for I have chosen you,’” declares the Lord of armies.

This is a reversal of the curse, marking the end of the captivity, and Zerubbabel, the grandson of Jeconiah becoming ruler (though not king). Clearly a descendant of Jeconiah did get to rule Judah!

It is believed by at least some Rabbinic Jews that the messiah must be a descendant of Zerubbabel, and clearly this was the view of the author of Matthew, who contrived a genealogy that goes through Jeconiah  and Zerubbabel.

More here.

Genealogies were important!

What we can see is that genealogies were very important. They were worth recording in scripture, they could determine a man's lot in life.

And they only concerned men.

What Does It Matter?

The point here is that the claim that Jesus was the Messiah is incompatible with the claim of a Virgin Birth. Either Jesus was a direct male-line descendant of David via Joseph, or he was the product of a Virgin Birth (or neither - Titus 3:9 and 1 Timothy 1:4 both tell us to ignore genealogies, perhaps because the author was aware Jesus was not of the House of David). The two are mutually exclusive.