In the gospel of Matthew the first challenge to the critic is the genealogy purporting to be that of Jesus Christ.
That challenge is met without fear or favor in these days; the wonder is that the subject remained unchallenged so long, and that its obvious falsity should have been excused and explained away by methods so absurd and so insincere as to cast serious doubt upon the honesty and also upon the intellectual capacity of its commentators.
The genealogy in Matthew’s Gospel may be briefly characterized as an utterly untrust-worthy record.
It is not the genealogy of Jesus Christ, because it is that of Joseph, who, we are distinctly told, was not the father of Jesus; it is not historically correct, according to the evidence of the Old Testament, and it is false as regards the numbers of generations asserted by Matthew to have existed between Abraham and Joseph. Luke,also, gives a genealogy which differs essentially from that of Matthew and from history, and is apologized for by Christian exegetists by equally dishonest arguments as those employed in the defense of Matthew.
The two genealogies have always been a stumbling-block to christian commentators. Matthew asserts that there are fourteen generations from Abraham to David; fourteen from David to the Babylonian Exile, and fourteen from the Exile to Christ-forty-two in all.
But in reality, according to his reckoning, there are thirteen generations from Abraham to David; fourteen from David to the Exile, and twelve from the Exile to Joseph-thirteen, including Jesus, although Jesus is declared not to be the son of Joseph-making thirty-nine without Jesus, and forty with him.
Now these blunders were perceived by even the earliest exegetists of the Gospels, and it is highly edifying, from an ethical point of view, to observe the various attempts to reconcile the glaring discrepancies. Jerome sugggests a mistake of the genealogist with regard to two of the names in the second division, a perfectly gratuitous assumption. Jerome says also that Matthew omitted certain names because he wished to ‘make’ each series consist of fourteen generations, and the persons omitted deserved the slight because they were wicked men.
Augustine counts one name twice, because when a series changes its direction the angle is reckoned twice; a principle which he applies to the Exile, but not the Exodus.
With the same ingenuity he accepts Jesus as descended from Joseph in order to make out forty generations, as this number denotes our temporal life, because there are four seasons in the year, and four sides to the world, and forty is ten times four, and ten is made up of a number proceeding from one to four. Augustine also notices the absence of the three names, and gives the same explanation as Jerome of the omission, as though the reason were sufficient and ought to be satisfactory to all concerned.
The rest of the book you can find it here Evans-The Christ Myth.