of these well-known figures. Raymond E. Brown feels these women are added to show that God often works through women and also that his actions are not always in keeping with standard mores. Feminist scholars such as Amy-Jill Levine support the idea that the addition of women to the male dominated genealogy demonstrates that women have an important role and serves to undermine the patriarchal message of the long list of male begat male. Jerome is the first to have noted the sinful nature of the women. Bathsheba was an adulteress and Rahab was a harlot. There were many greater, more notable, and more virtuous women in Jewish history that are not mentioned. Jerome felt Matthew includes these women to illustrate how pressing the need for Jesus is at the time. Robert H. Gundry agrees that all four have a dubious reputation and sees their addition to the genealogy as an attempt to show that the great leaders of Jewish history have origins as undignified as those of Jesus. Harolf Fowler disagrees, arguing that under any circumstances the author of Matthew would have been unlikely to link the Virgin Mary to harlots and adulterers. Another important link between the four, first noted by John Chrysostom, is their foreignness. All four women were traditionally regarded as non-Jewish. Rahab was a Canaanite as most likely was Tamar. Ruth was a Moabite and Bathsheba is perhaps a Hittite and was certainly married to one. Bathsheba's foreignness is emphasized in Matthew 1:6 as she is referred to not by her name, but as "the wife of Uriah," Uriah being Uriah the Hittite, a well-known foreigner. The inclusion of the four foreign women is often interpreted as showing that Jesus' is not only meant as the saviour of the Jews, but of the Gentiles as well. References Sources 01:03 Saint Joseph (husband of Mary)