First Next ->

MATTHEW
INTRODUCTION.
SUMMARY OF INTRODUCTION.
1 .- 3 . The constituent parts of the First Gospel. 1. The Framework. 2. The Discourses. 3. Matter peculiar to the First Gospel. 4 - 9 . These represent different sources. 4. The Framework: to whom it may be traced. 5-7. The Discourses. 5. External evidence fails us. 6, 7. Internal evidence. 6. Negative: the First Gospel considered in itself. the First Gospel considered in relation to the Third. 7. Positive, especially in re doublets. 8. Matter peculiar to the First Gospel. 9. These sources were probably oral. 10-15. The authorship of the present Gospel. 10, 11. Preliminary inquiry apart from the question of its original language. 10. Internal evidence is purely negative. 11. External evidence. 12-15. What was the original language of this Gospel ? 12. Internal evidence points to a Greek original. 13, 14. External evidence. 13. A. Probability of the existence of an Aramaic Gospel confirmed by recent investigations. 14. B. Direct external evidence. 15. Solutions. 16. Canonicity. 17. To whom was the Gospel addressed? 18. Place of writing.
First Next ->

M ULTImEDIA L ABS
Thank you for your purchase!
We hope you get much use and blessing from this disk.

Interested in seeing more CDs like this one?

Click here to visit our Ebay homepage:

http://stores.ebay.com/GraceWorks-MM
We are adding new Biblical publications regularly. Would you like to be notified when there are new items available? Click on Sign Up (bottom of the left column at the homepage above) to receive an email newsletter when new CDs are released.

<- Previous First Next ->

19. Time of writing. 20. Life of St. Matthew. 21. The meaning of the phrase, the kingdom of heaven. 22. Plan of the Gospel.

1. THE CONSTITUENT PARTS OF THE FIRST GOSPEL.

THE constituent parts of the First Gospel, as it lies before us, are (1) the Historical Framework; (2) the Discourses; (3) the matter peculiar to this Gospel. It will be necessary to say a few words about each of these. 1. (1) The Historical Framework. Upon comparing the First with the other two synoptic Gospels it will be seen that there is running through them all a certain outline of common matter, beginning with the baptism of our Lord, and tracing the more important events of his public life until his death and resurrection, omitting, therefore, what preceded the baptism and what followed the resurrection. In character this Framework consists of brief narratives, the connexion between which is not always apparent, and which have for their central point some utterance of the Lord, remark; able for its importance and often also for its brevity. f1 So far as this Framework is recorded in words or parts of words common to the three synoptists, it has been called by the name of the Triple Tradition; f2 but it must be noticed that this title is by its originator, Dr. E. A. Abbott, f3 expressly limited to identity of language, and therefore fails to indicate fully the practical identity that often exists even when verbal identity is wanting. f4 (cf. 4). 2. (2) The Discourses. These are (a) the sermon on the mount ( <400503>Matthew 5:3-7:27); (b) the commission to the disciples ( <401005>Matthew 10:5-42); (c) respecting John the Baptist ( <401107>Matthew 11:7-19); (d) against the Pharisees ( <401225>Matthew 12:25-45);

(e) parables of the kingdom ( <401301>Matthew 13:1-52); (f) discipleship especially humility, sympathy, and responsibility (Matthew 18.); (g) parables ( <402128>Matthew 21:28-22:14);
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

(h) woes on the Pharisees (Matthew 23.); (i) the coming of the end (Matthew 24., 25.). Observe: First, that five of these, viz. a, b, e, f, i , are followed by the formula, And it came to pass, when Jesus ended these words Of the remaining four, c, d, g are shorter and of less importance than these five, while h is followed so immediately by i (though clearly a separate discourse) that we should hardly expect to find the customary concluding formula. Secondly, that of these only the following are found in the other Gospels in at all the form of connected discourses, viz. a ( vide Luke 6.); b (hardly, but for the first part cf. <421002>Luke 10:2-16); e ( vide <420724>Luke 7:24, sqq.); h (partly in Luke 11.); i (for ch. 24., vide Mark 13., cf. Luke 21.; and for <402514> Matthew 25:14-30, vide <421911>Luke 19:11-28). Thirdly, that although many parts of them are found also in Luke, and slightly in Mark, yet frequently these are recorded in quite a different context, and sometimes the connexion as recorded in Luke seems much more likely to be the original than that recorded in Matthew. Of this the Lords Prayer ( <400609>Matthew 6:9-13; parallel, <421102>Luke 11:2-4) is a crucial instance ( vide notes, in loc. ), and others, almost equally certain, occur in parts of the Great Commission (see notes on <401017>Matthew 10:17, 39, 4042). 3. (3) Matter other than Discourses peculiar to the First Gospel. Of this there are three kinds. f5 (a) Matter of the same general character as that contained in the Framework (e.g. <401428>Matthew 14:28-33; 16:17-19; 17:24-27; 19:10-12; 27:3-10, 62-66; 28:920). In close connexion with this may be considered passages of the same character, which are not indeed peculiar to this Gospel, but are found also in either the second (especially <401406>Matthew 14:6-12; 14:22-27 [of. <430615>John 6:15-21], 34-36; 15:1-39; 17:11, 12, 19, 20; 19:1-6; 20:20-23;

21:18, 19; 26:6-13 [of. <431201>John 12:1-11]; 27:27-31) or the third (especially <400403>Matthew 4:3-11; 8:5-13, 19-22; 9:32-34 [cf. 12:22-24]). (b) The opening sections, viz. the genealogy ( <400101>Matthew 1:1-17) and the narrative of the birth and infancy ( <400118>Matthew 1:18-2:23).
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

(c) Other details of our Lords words and actions, which cannot be classed under a, or remarks which bring out his relation to the Old Testament and Jewish institutions ( e.g . <400412>Matthew 4:12-16; 21:4, 5, 10, 11).

2. THESE REPRESENT DIFFERENT SOURCES.

4. How it came about that the First Gospel presents these constituent parts how, that is to say, we must account for the formation of this Gospel, is a question of the greatest possible difficulty. We have so little external information about the origines of the evangelical records that we must form our impressions from internal evidence alone, Hence, not unnaturally, many answers have been given which differ greatly and often contradict each other. I shall content myself with giving that one which seems least exposed to objections. It is that the three constituent parts represent three sources, the firs& two being entirely external to the author, existing, that is to say, before he composed our Gospel, f6 and the third being partly of the same kind, aria partly due, as it would seem, to him alone. (1) The Historical Framework . If the Triple Tradition be followed as it is marked in Rushbrookes Synopticon (where it is given in the order of St. Marks Gospel), it will be seen to begin with the message delivered by John the Baptist in the wilderness, then to mention the baptism and the temptation, and after that to go on to the call of Simon and another, f7 and of James and John the sons of Zebedee, by Jesus as he passed along by the flea of Galilee. Then, after speaking of the astonishment caused by the teaching of Jesus, it relates his entrance into the house and his healing the mother-in-law [of Simon]; and then it speaks of others also coming to him and being healed, Jesus afterwards preaching in the synagogues of Galilee. We need not trace the narrative further, but it is pertinent to ask f8 in whose recollection these events would stand out most prominently, and to answer that the original narrator was probably one of those four to whom the call to follow Jesus made no great a difference. But not only so; the choice is limited from another consideration, for such signs of an eye-witness as exist in the Triple Tradition (it is something we can see and mark, and therefore more

tangible to us than the whole Framework) point still more definitely in the same direction. What, indeed, are signs of an eye-witness it is often not easy to decide, but among theme may be placed (still following, for convenience, the order in the Synopticon) <410141>Mark 1:41, stretched forth his hand; <410203>Mark 2:3, bringing... a paralytic; <410214>Mark 2:14,
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

[Levi] arose and followed him; <410223>Mark 2:23, going through the cornfields; <410439>Mark 4:39, he arose and rebuked the wind..; and there was a calm; <410540>Mark 5:40, and they laughed him to scorn; <410541>Mark 5:41, he took the hand; <410907>Mark 9:7, a cloud overshadowed them a voice out of the cloud; <411022>Mark 10:22, the grief of the young man; <411046>Mark 10:46, a blind man sat by the wayside; <411052>Mark 10:52, he received his night, and followed him; <411445>Mark 14:45, 47, the kiss of Judas, and the cutting off the ear of the high priests servant with a sword; <411530>Mark 15:30, 31, the jeer, Save thyself, and the high priests mockery; <411537>Mark 15:37, Jesus crying with a loud voice at the moment of death. Most of these marks of an eye-witness give us no further help towards discovering the original narrator than by showing us that he must have been among the twelve, but according to two of them he must have been among those three, viz. Peter, James, and John, who were with our Lord both in Jairus house ( <410537>Mark 5:37; <420851>Luke 8:51) and at the Transfiguration (the Triple Tradition, <410902>Mark 9:2). But of these three apostles there is no reason for preferring fit. James (though the fact of his early death is not a great difficulty), and the style and character of St. Johns writing is so well known to us from the Fourth Gospel, his Epistles, and the Apocalypse, that it is impossible to attribute the Triple Tradition to him. But fit. Peter suits the phenomena in every way. He was present on all the occasions, including perhaps ( <430141>John 1:41) that of the testimony of the Baptist; and no one is more likely to have recorded his words at the Transfiguration, or the words addressed to him at his denial of his Master, than himself. Fully in accordance with this is the fact that that Gospel (Mark)which keeps most exclusively to the Triple Tradition, and which most often supplements it by further undoubted signs of an eye-witness, is the one which has from the time of Papias onward f9 been attributed specially to the influence of St. Peter. Although, therefore, it is not a matter that admits of absolute demonstration, yet it may be concluded with comparative certainty that the first and chief basis of the First Gospel, what I have called the Historical Framework, is derived ultimately from this apostle. f10

(2) The Discourses . This second source is much more the subject of present controversy than the first, it being very hard to determine whether the existing discourses represent a distinct source used by the composer of the First Gospel, or are merely his own arrangement of certain sayings of the Lord found by him in various connexions.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

5. It must be frankly confessed that we get no assistance upon this subject from external evidence. It has been supposed, indeed, that Papias (circa A . D . 130) alludes to such a collection of the Lords utterances both in the very name of his work () and in his statement that Matthew composed in the Hebrew tongue (Eusebius, Ch. Hist . , 3:39) f11; but Bishop Lightfoot has demonstrated (Essays on Supernatural Religion, p. 173, sqq. ) that is equivalent to Divine oracles, and that these are not to be limited to sayings only, but include just such narratives as we have in the Gospel generally. Thus the word is used of the Old Testament Scriptures in
<450302>

Romans 3:2, without any hint of limitation to sayings, and again in the same way in <580512>Hebrews 5:12, where such a limitation is excluded by the author of that epistle eliciting the Divine teaching quite as much from the history as from the direct precepts of the Old Testament. So again it is found in Philo and in Clement of Rome with the same wide reference, narratives being treated as part of the Divine oracles as well as sayings. When, therefore, we find Polycarp speaking of the oracles of the Lord (), or Irenaeus, immediately after having used a similar term (), referring to the healing of the daughter of Jairus, it is natural to consider that neither of them intended (as some have supposed them to have done) to limit the application of the word to our Lords sayings in contrast to his works. From the consideration of these and other arguments brought forward by Bishop Lightfoot , it seems clear that Papias used the term in the same way as we might use the word oracles at the present day, viz. as equivalent to the Scriptures. His book may well have been composed with reference to our present Gospels, and the volume which he says St. Matthew wrote may have been (so far as this one word is concerned) that which we now know by the apostles name. f12

6. Compelled, then, as we are, to reject all fictitious aid from external evidence, since this has been misunderstood, it is the more necessary to inquire into the internal evidence afforded by the First Gospel itself and into the evidence afforded by its relation to the Third Gospel. In some respects, indeed, the evidence continues to be unfavourable to the view

put forward above, that the Discourses existed as a separate work before the writing of our First Gospel. For, first, it might fairly be expected that, if the Discourses were already distinct, they would show traces of this original distinction in their difference of language and style. So no doubt they do to some extent, but not to a greater degree than can be accounted for by the fact that they are discourses, and, as such, deal with matters different from those contained in the Framework, and treat them, naturally,
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

in a different way. Indeed, the wonder is, if they represent real speeches by the Lord if, that is to say, they are reproductions of sustained argument by him that they do not show more divergence from the type of the short, pointed remarks common in the Framework. Observe, also, that the quotations in the Discourses from the Old Testament generally agree with those of the Framework in Being taken from the LXX. (contrast infra , 12). This points to both Discourses and Framework being formed at much the same time and among congregations of similar culture and acquirements. Secondly, a similar negative result is obtained by comparing the discourses found in the First Gospel with those that are found in the Third. It has been already pointed out ( 2) that some are found in the latter, but not in their entirety, and that detached portions are also found sometimes in a context that gives the impression of more originality than that in which St. Matthew embeds them. Do we see that St. Luke knew of a collection of Discourses such as has been supposed above? The answer is purely negative. We see separate discourses, and these so far varying in language from those in Matthew as to make it clear that they had had a history before being recorded by either St. Luke or St. Matthew, but there is no sign of these discourses being collected together. Certainly, if they were, St. Luke did not regard their arrangement. Dr. Salmon, indeed (p. 139, edit. 1888), goes as far as to say that a comparison of St. Lukes order in narrating our Lords sayings gives the deathblow to the theory of a collection of Discourses. St. Luke, however, may have had many reasons for not adopting a particular order. If, for instance, he was acquainted both with such a collection and also with narratives containing the utterances in more historical connexion, there seems no reason why he should have preferred the former to the latter. His aim was not that of the author of the First Gospel, to present clearly Before his readers the Lord Jesus as a Teacher, to bring out his relation to the religion of the day, but much more to exhibit him as the Saviour of the world; and for this purpose narratives of his actions and records of his other teaching bringing out the universality of his love would be more effective. St. Lukes object, so far as we are in a position to argue on a priori grounds from the nature of his second treatise (and apart from the actual state of his first), was to show how fitted the gospel of Christ was to Become the religion of the whole world.

The idea of universality running through the Acts and the Third Gospel is a reason of no little weight why we should suppose that the author should have deliberately rejected the arrangement of the collection of Discourses, even if this lay before him. For in the form in which they are found in the First
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

Gospel they would not have suited his purpose. It is true that St. Luke did not refuse to follow the general order of the Framework, but this was probably in the main chronological, and even if it had not Been so this would not affect him, but the Discourses must have Been ( ex hypothesi ) summaries of our Lords teaching upon different subjects, made from the Judaeo-Christian standpoint. St. Lukes use, therefore, of the Framework in such a way as to keep the order of it weighs little as an argument for the conclusion that he would have observed the order of the collection of Discourses if he had known of such a collection. 7. So far the examination of the theory that a collection of Discourses existed before the writing of the First Gospel has proved only negative. There are, however, two reasons in favour of such a theory. (1) It seems much more probable that a collection would be made by (me who were making it his special aim, than that a writer should take the Framework and pick out pieces that properly belonged to it and make them into discourses. In other words, it seems easier to suppose the ]Discourses to be the work of one who was only a collector of the Lords saying, than of one who used, at the same time and for the same writing, the narratives of incidents, etc., to present a picture of the Lords work. (2) But not only so. The presence in the First Gospel of doublets, i.e. of repetitions of the same sayings in different forms and connexions, may most easily be explained by the evangelist using different sources. f13 For it is more natural to suppose the second member of a doublet to have already existed before the author of the First Gospel wrote, and that he did not mind incorporating it (if he Perceived that it was a doublet) with the rest of the material drawn from that source, than that he should deliberately give the saying once in its original context and, himself taking it out of that context , record it a second time. Doublets may easily come by unconscious accretion, or one member may be recorded out of its original context merely for the sake of its didactic connexion with that context, but one cannot imagine an author deliberately giving one member in its original and another (the duplicate) in its didactic context, unless he already found the latter in the second source that he was using. f14

In spite, therefore, of the absence of all external evidence, and in spite of the purely negative evidence both of style and language, and of the order of the sayings found in the Third Gospel, it seem probable, both a priori and on account of the presence of doublets, that the writer of the First Gospel
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

found ready to his hand some such collection of the Lords sayings as are represented by the Discourses that he records. 8. Of the third constituent part there is but little to be said in this connexion. The matter, which is of the same general character as that contained in the Framework, may have originally belonged to this, but the genealogy must, one would suppose, have been derived from Marys household. From the same quarter perhaps Personally from Mary herself, or perhaps from our Lords brethren, who obtained it from Joseph must have come both the account of the birth and the materials for the second chapter. But it is to be noticed that the references to the Old Testament in these two sections f15 point rather to growth in a community than representation by one person. They would appear, that is to say, to be rather the result of Church consideration and teaching than of individual insight. The other details referred to under 3 c may be due partly to current teaching, partly to personal knowledge, and, where interpretation and standpoint are considered, partly to subjective impressions and aims. 9. But the question must have already suggested itself whether these various sources existed in documentary or only in oral form. If we were considering the case of modern Western nations there would be no doubt whatever as to the answer. The invention of printing and the spread of elementary education have increased the culture of all arts except that of recitation. Hence with us the training of the memory does not consist so much in committing long passages to heart as in amassing details of knowledge regardless of the exact words in which the information is conveyed and in so co-ordinating them in our minds as to be able to grasp their relative significance and to apply them when they are required. But in the East, to a great extent even to the present day, the system is different Education still consists largely in learning by heart the maxims of the wise. The teacher sits on a chair, the pupils arrange them selves at his feet. He dictates a lesson, they copy it on their slates and repeat it till they have mastered it. Then the task is over, the slates arc cleaned and put by for future use. Substitute for the slates and pencils a writing-tablet and stylus , and you will have a scene which must have been common in the days of the apostles. The teacher is a catechist, the pupils catechumens, the lesson a section of the oral

gospel. Further, while too much stress (see Stracks Einleitung in den Thalmud, p. 39, sqq .) has often been laid on the rabbinic principle, Commit nothing to writing, f17 yet the principle may probably be rightly used to show that the tendency of the Jews in apostolic times was to teach orally rather than by books, and
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

we may accept Mr. Wrights vivid picture as accurately describing what was usually done. But other considerations of greater importance Point the same way. The hope of the speedy return of the Lord would not, indeed, prevent the taking of written notes of oral instructions, had that been the custom, but would certainly tend to prevent the formal composition of written accounts of him; and, most important of all, the relation of the different forms of the narratives preserved to us in the synoptic Gospels seems to require oral, not documentary, transmission. The frequent minuteness and unimportance, as one would say, of the differences are often almost inexplicable on the supposition that the evangelists had written documents before them which they altered. It might be the case in one or two places, but that they should make such minute alterations throughout seems most improbable. f18 On the supposition of transmission by word of mouth, on the contrary, such differences are explained at once. f19 A sentence would be transmitted accurately to the first and almost, but probably not quite, as accurately to the second person. The latter, in his turn, would transmit all save that which was of the least importance. The result would be that, after a section had gone through many mouths, the central thought of a passage or of a sentence the more important words, that is to say would still be present, but there would be numberless variations of greater and less importance, the character of which would depend largely upon the position and standpoint of the individuals through whom the section had been transmitted. If it were now written down by two or three persons who had received it by different lines of transmission, it is reasonable to suppose that the results would be very like the three forms of the common part of the Framework contained in the synoptists, or the two forms of those sayings peculiar to any two of them. Whether, indeed, this writing down had at all taken place before the synoptists wrote, so that they used the oral teaching in written forms, cannot be shown. There seems to be no case in the Greek, in which variations may so certainly be traced to errors of sight as to compel us to believe that they used a common document in Greek, and the only direct reason that exists for supposing that the sources which they used had been crystallized into writing lies in the preface to

the Third Gospel. St. Luke knew of such. But whether either he or the other evangelists used them for their Gospels, we cannot say. In one case, indeed, that of the genealogies, it might be thought that such written documents must have been used. But even this is not necessary. It may be granted that genealogies were at that
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

time usually written down, and that documents of this kind may have been employed by the evangelists, but, whatever St. Luke may have done, the form of the genealogy found in the First Gospel, by its artificial and almost inaccurate arrangement into three sections of fourteen generations each, points to oral rather than documentary transmission. f20

3. THE AUTHOR OF THE PRESENT GOSPEL.

Having considered the constituent parts of the First Gospel, and the probable sources from which they were derived, it is natural to ask who it was that united them who, that is to say, was the author of this Gospel? It will conduce to clearness if the subject be considered, first of all, without any reference to the kindred question of the original language of the Gospel. It cannot, indeed, be answered fully before the latter question also is touched upon, but it is well to keep this as distinct as possible. 10. Internal evidence. What assistance does the Gospel itself give us towards solving the problem of its authorship? That the author was a Jew will be granted by all. A Gentile Christian never would or could have described the relation of Jesus to the Jews and to their teaching in the way that the author has described it. The fact of his Jewish standpoint is further indicated by his Old Testament quotations. This is hardly the place in which to treat of these in detail; it is sufficient to note that the author knows not only the form of the Old Testament quotations that was current among the Greek-speaking Christians, f21 but also such interpretations of the original text as would exist only among people trained in Jewish methods, for he quotes it in cases where the reference is, at the best; very remote (cf.
<400215>

Matthew 2:15, 18, notes). It may, then, be accepted as incontestable that the author was a Jew by birth, versed from his youth in the Hebrew Scriptures, and looking upon them from a Jewish standpoint. Yet, if we except some very slight and doubtful indications of the place and the date of his writing ( vide infra, 18, 19), we cannot learn much about the author

from the Gospel itself. It is only natural to examine it with the view of finding out whether it contains any marks of an eyewitness. But in doing so care must be taken. For it is evident that signs of an eye-witness recurring in one or two of the other synoptic Gospels belong rather to the sources used than to the author himself. So that not the whole Gospel as it stands, but only those passages and phrases which are peculiar to it, are to be considered. And when this is done the result is almost negative. The contrast to the result of examining the Second Gospel in the same way is
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

enormous. There the innumerable undesigned touches point unmistakably to the presence of an eye-witness; here there is almost if not quite a blank. f22 Internal evidence, then, says nothing at all personal about the author of the First Gospel, other than that he was a Jewish Christian. It gives no indication whatever that he stood in any close relation to the Lord, much less that he was one of the apostolic band who travelled with him, sharing his privations, seeing his miracles, and hearing his private teaching. Internal evidence does not absolutely contradict the supposition that the author is St. Matthew, but is certainly rather against it. 11. External evidence. But when we turn to the external evidence, matters stand very differently. There never appears to have been any doubt in the early Church (cf. 14) that the First Gospel was composed by St. Matthew, and it is hard to understand why so comparatively unknown and unimportant a member of the twelve should have been named if he were not, in fact, the author. It is with him as it is with St. Mark, and as it would have been with St. Luke if the Book of the Acts had not been written. For if St. Luke had not written the second volume of his work, no one of the synoptic narratives could have been compared with a writing attributed to the same author as itself, and the authorship of all three would have rested on a tradition which finds the chief reason for its acceptance in the difficulty of explaining how it could have arisen if it were not true. It seems hard to believe that the early Church could be wrong in its assertion that the author of the First Gospel was St. Matthew, but the belief depends on a tradition, the cause of which cannot be demonstrated, and which is only just not contradicted by the phenomena of the Gospel itself.

4. WHAT WAS THE ORIGINAL LANGUAGE OF THE GOSPEL?

12. It has, however, been thought that the original language of the Gospel was not Greek, but Hebrew, i.e. some kind of Aramaic. It will Be in accordance with the lines of our previous inquiries to consider, first , the evidence of the Gospel itself as to its original-language, without reference to any considerations derived from other quarters; secondly , to notice reasons that may be adduced for

thinking that an Aramaic Gospel, either oral or written, was in existence during the first century; thirdly , to examine the direct external testimony that connects St. Matthew with such a Gospel.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

(1) As regards the Gospel itself there is but little doubt. It is, indeed, saturated with Semitic, and particularly Jewish, thought and idioms, and the genealogy and also, perhaps, the remainder of the first two chapters may be directly or almost directly a translation from the Aramaic. But all the other phenomena of the Gospel contradict the supposition that it is a translation as we generally use the word. The Framework must have already existed in Greek f22 (whatever its original language may have been) if any satisfactory theory of it being used by all three evangelists is to be formed. The frequent minute verbal agreement necessitates this, and notwithstanding the fact that Professor Marshall shows that a few of the differences in the synoptists are accounted for by a common Aramaic original (cf. 13), the evangelists themselves can hardly have used it when they wrote their Gospels. Similarly, the Discourses, or at least large portions of them, must have been known in Greek to the two authors of the First and Third Gospels. The principal sources, that is to say, f23 must assuredly have existed in Greek before they were used by the evangelists. But should it be said that St. Matthew originally used these two sources in Aramaic, and that the corresponding Greek phrases and words and parts of words were only inserted by the translator (whoever he was) from his acquaintance with the other Gospels, then it must be answered that such a work would not only be altogether opposed to the spirit of ancient translations, but would be quite impossible from the minute and microscopic character of the process which it presupposes. Besides, the distribution of the quotations is against the present Gospel being a translation. For how can we suppose a translator to have scrupulously observed the distinction between the quotations which are common to the synoptists, or which belong to the same kind of teaching ( vide supra , 6), and those which are peculiar to the evangelist, so that he nearly always took the former from the LXX. and the latter from the Hebrew? f24 Further, the paronomasia f25 are unlikely in a translation. Again, the explanations of Hebrew words f26 and customs f27 indicate that the Gospel in its present form was intended not for Jews alone, f28 since Jews of the Dispersion would surely understand the meaning of the very ordinary Hebrew words thus explained. Such explanations might, indeed, in themselves be interpolated by a translator. When, however, they are

taken with the other evidence they are not unimportant. 13. (2) Yet although our First Gospel shows so few traces of being a translation from an Aramaic original, it is very probable that some Aramaic Gospel existed. f29 Hence attempts have often been made to discover traces
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

of an Aramaic Gospel underlying those that we now have, and forming the background to the thoughts of writers of other parts of the New Testament. It is evident that if the Aramaic language will account for the variations in individual words existing in parallel narratives, then the vera causa of such variations lies in an Aramaic original being variously translated. By far the most satisfactory and convincing attempt is that made by Professor Marshall, in the Expositor for 1890 and 1891. Though several of his examples are far-fetched, or require too much change in the Aramaic words before these were translated into Greek, yet a few appear to be highly probable. f30 It may, however, be doubted whether even those results that have been obtained necessitate an Aramaic writing. The differences are generally, if not always, explicable by sound rather than by sight, and suggest an oral rather than a documentary origin. 14. (3) That, however, St. Matthew wrote in Hebrew (Aramaic), the early Church seems to have held as certain. The testimony is so important that it must be quoted at length. Papias (circa A . D . 130): So then Matthew composed the oracles in the Hebrew language, and each one interpreted them as he was able. f31 Irenaeus (circa A . D . 180): Now Matthew among the Hebrews published a writing of the Gospel in their own language, while Peter and Paul were preaching the gospel in Rome and founding the Church. f32 Origen (circa A . D . 230): Having learned by tradition concerning the four Gospels, which are alone indisputable in the Church of God under heaven, that there was written first that which is according to Matthew, who was once a publican, but afterwards an apostle of Jesus Christ, and it was issued to those who once were Jews but had believed, and was composed in Hebrew. f33 Eusebius himself (circa A . D . 330) is no independent witness, as is clear from two of the above quotations being found in his works, but is important for the further testimony that he adduces, and also for his own opinion, he tells us that it

is reported that when Pantaenus (circa A . D . 190), the first teacher of the Alexandrian school, went to India to preach the gospel, he found that the Gospel according to Matthew had preceded his appearance, and was in the hands of some on the spot, who already knew Christ, to whom Bartholomew, one of the apostles, had preached, and had
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

left behind him the writing of Matthew in the very character of the Hebrews, and that this was even preserved until the time referred to. f34 Eusebius says elsewhere, Of all the disciples of the Lord, only Matthew and John have left us written memorials, and they, tradition says, were led to write only under the pressure of necessity. For Matthew, who had at first preached to Hebrews, when he was about to go to others also, committed his Gospel to writing in his native tongue, and thus compensated those from whom he was withdrawing himself for the loss of his presence. f35 So, too, when comparing <402801>Matthew 28:1 with <432001>John 20:1, he says, The expression, on the evening of the sabbath, is due to the translator of the Scripture; for the Evangelist Matthew published his Gospel in the Hebrew tongue; but the person who rendered it into the Greek language changed it and called the hour dawning on the Lords day . f36 Ephraem the Syrian (circa A . D . 360) tells us, Matthew wrote the Gospel in Hebrew, and it was afterwards translated into Greek. f37 Cyril of Jerusalem (circa
A.D

. 370) says, Matthew, who wrote the Gospel, wrote it in the Hebrew tongue. f38

Two witnesses, however, give much more detailed accounts. Epiphanius (circa A . D . 380), in describing the sect of the Nazarenes, says that they had the Gospel of St. Matthew complete written in Hebrew without, perhaps, the genealogy. He had, therefore, apparently not himself seen it, but he knew enough of it to compare it favourably with a Hebrew Gospel used by the Ebionites, which was corrupted and mutilated. f39 Jerome, however (circa A . D . 890), goes much further. He not only accepts the common view that St. Matthew wrote in Hebrew, f40 but he says that a copy of it in Hebrew was still preserved in the library at Caesarea, and, even that he himself had transcribed the Hebrew Gospel with the leave of the Nazarenes who

lived at Beroea in Syria (Aleppo), and who used that Gospel. f41 Yet the very details which Jerome gives show that the Hebrew Gospel which ha translated could not have been the original of our Matthew. Why, indeed, translate it at all if a translation, in our sense of the word, already existed? For he gives us no hint that his aim was only to improve the ordinary translation. But his words show that the book which he translated was, in fact, very different to our Matthew, and was a complete copy of what has come down to us only in fragments, the socalled Gospel according to the Hebrews. f42 What the relation of the
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

original Hebrew work of St. Matthew (if there was one) was to this is not our immediate subject. Jeromes words are in reality, notwithstanding the first impression that they give, against the theory of a Hebrew original of our Matthew, for they suggest that the mistake made by him as to the identity of the work may have been made by others before him. Whether or not this was the case we have no means of finally deciding. The other statements fall into two groups the statement about Pantaenus, and those of the remaining witnesses as quoted. That about Pantaenus is very curious, but what basis of truth underlies it we cannot say. He seems to have found a Hebrew Gospel in some place that he visited which was inhabited by a large Jewish population perhaps the south of Arabia, where was the Jewish kingdom of Yemen, or less probably the Malabar coast of India proper, where Jews have lived from time immemorial. But that this Gospel represented the original form of our present Matthew is just such an assertion as might be expected to grow out of the report of his finding some Hebrew Gospel there, when joined with the current belief in the Hebrew original of the First Gospel. The statement that St. Bartholomew brought it there may rest upon some Basis of fact, but is probably due to an earlier legend which has not come down to us. 15. The other statements, if they are independent, and there is no sufficient reason for supposing that they are all ultimately due to Papias, are more important, and cannot easily be disposed of. The question is How are we to interpret their united evidence in view of the probability already expressed, that our Gospel is not a translation, and that we must attribute it in some way to St. Matthew? Three solutions of the difficulty have been put forward. The first is that St. Matthew composed, or caused to be composed, f43 a collection of the Lords utterances, and that this was used by the author of the First Gospel, the name Matthew being applied to this latter Gospel also, because so important a part of it had in reality proceeded from that apostle. On this theory it will be observed that the term Logia used by Papias receives a sense more restricted than usage warrants; also that the later testimonies to the Hebrew original of the First Gospel will be due to a facile enlargement of what are,

according to the theory, the true facts of the case. They state that St. Matthew composed a whole Gospel in Hebrew, although, in fact, he only composed the Utterances. The second solution is that St. Matthew composed a Hebrew Gospel which has entirely perished, and afterwards himself published our Greek Gospel.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

But the objections to this are twofold. His Hebrew Gospel could not have been represented very closely by the present Greek text ( vide aspca , 12), and the idea of a version of it put forth by authority is quite opposed to Papias testimony. In Papias time our First Gospel was evidently accepted, but in earlier times, as he tells us, each translated the Hebrew as he was able a process which would have been wholly unnecessary if this second solution of the difficulties had been the true one. f44 The third is that the belief in a Hebrew original is nothing more than a mistake. Papias and later authors knew personally and for a fact only the First Gospel in its present form, and considered that St. Matthew was the author of it, but they knew also that there was a Hebrew Gospel in existence, and that this was, rightly or wrongly, reported to be written by St. Matthew. They assumed the accuracy of the report, and supposed that it must have been the original form of the First Gospel. But their assumption was mistaken. If so, it is natural for us to go a step further, and identify this Hebrew Gospel with the Gospel according to the Hebrews, f45 so that the mistake of Papias and the others will be practically identical with that of Epiphanius and Jerome. It must be observed, however, that of the writers quoted above, Origen and Eusebius were well acquainted with the Gospel according to the Hebrews, and that they did not think of identifying this with the original of Matthew. Further, it is clear that they had never seen the Hebrew original of the First Gospel, notwithstanding that they fully believed that it once existed. They may, therefore, have been only reproducing the Churchs opinion of their time, without any independent reasons for their belief. This third solution is certainly the most free from difficulties.

5. CANONICITY.
16. It has been abundantly shown, even by the passages already adduced for other purposes, that this Gospel was unanimously accepted in the early Church. Probably also it is the very earliest of all the New Testament writings that is quoted as Scripture, for the Epistle of Barnabas (placed by Bishop Lightfoot f46 during the reign of Vespasian, A . D . 70-79) distinctly refers to it in this way,

introducing a quotation from it ( <402214>Matthew 22:14) by the phrase, as it is written. f47

<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

6. TO WHOM WAS THE GOSPEL FIRST ADDRESSED?

17. Evidently, from its whole tone, Jewish Christians were chiefly thought of, but the fact that Gentile Christians seem to have been included (cf, 12) points to the communities addressed being not limited to those in Palestine. It is true that <402426>Matthew 24:26, the wilderness and the tombs, and perhaps also <402420>Matthew 24:20 (for we may suppose that the Palestinian Jews observed the sabbath more strictly than those exposed to Gentile influences) suggest rather Palestinian readers (cf. also <401041>Matthew 10:41, note), but, first , these verses are in a Discourse, and therefore probably belong to the sources rather than to the Gospel itself; and, secondly, with the close intercourse between the Jews of Palestine and those of the Dispersion, whatever was said specially to the former would be of the deepest interest and importance also to the latter.

7. THE PLACE OF WAITING.

18. This can be only conjectured, for the evidence is at most but negative. If the Gospel was, like the Epistle of St. James ( <590101>James 1:1), written for Jewish Christians of the Dispersion, there is no reason to suggest Palestine rather than any other country, save that Palestine would naturally be the home to which St. Matthew would return when opportunity offered. It should be observed that the phrase, that land, in <400926> Matthew 9:26, 31, excludes Galilee or perhaps Northern Palestine. There seems nothing to forbid the supposition that it was written in Jerusalem.

8. THE TIME OF WRITING.

19. This also can only be conjectured. If the date assigned to the Epistle of Barnabas ( vide supra , 16) be right, and if his quotation can be fully accepted as showing that this Gospel was already in existence, we have as an inferior limit the year 79 A . D . But in both particulars so much doubt exists that not much dependence can be placed upon this argument. Such others as there are give us no great exactness, but suggest an inferior limit

of about the same date. The First Gospel, as well as the Second and the Third, appears clearly to belong to an earlier type of teaching than the Fourth Gospel, f48 and as modern criticism is gradually showing that this cannot be placed much, if at all, later than A . D . 100, and may, perhaps, be ten or fifteen years earlier, the synoptio Gospels cannot be put much later than A . D . 75.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

The hints of a date in the First Gospel itself are only those connected with the siege of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple ( <402337>Matthew 23:37, 38; 24.). It may, indeed, be urged that one reason why the Lords prophecy was recorded lay in the event already having come to pass before the record (not before the prophecy)was made. There will always be a difference of opinion in cases of this kind, but it seems probable that, had these prophecies been only recorded after their fulfilment, they would have been modified into closer accordance with the details of the siege. It is more important to bear in mind that there must have been some lapse of time between the first formation of the sources by oral teaching and their transmission in the forms finally adopted either in the First or in one of the other synoptic Gospels. Yet twenty years would, perhaps, be all that is required, and as the sources might have been begun quite early say A . D . 35 or 40 the year 60 would allow a fully long enough period to elapse. The limits would thus be about A . D . 60 and A . D . 75. f49

9. THE LIFE OF ST. MATTHEW.

20. If we may assume that Levi the son of Alphaeus ( <410214>Mark 2:14) was of about the same age as our Lord (and while we have no hint that he was younger, it is very improbable that he was much older, for our Lord would hardly have chosen as his apostles those who by reason of their age would soon become unfitted to endure the difficulties and hardships involved in such an office), we may place his birth about B . C . 4 or 5 ( <400201>Matthew 2:1, note). Of the place of his birth we know nothing, but we may again assume that it was in Galilee. Perhaps it was Capernaum. In his early youth he must often have heard of Judas of Galilee, who had first gathered a number of men round him at Sepphoris (some twenty miles from Capernaum), making the whole country unsafe (Schurer, 1. 2:4), and afterwards ( A . D . 6 or 7) urged the people to rebel, and gave rise to the sect of the Zealots ( <401004>Matthew 10:4, note). But however much his boyish imagination may have been fired with zeal for the political and religious independence of his nation, he appears to have been in

manhood content to take things as they were. For we find him engaged, not, like others of the twelve, in private business, but in collecting the custom-revenues that went to maintain the tetrarchy of Antipas ( <400909>Matthew 9:9, note). This was one degree better than if he had collected them in Judaea, and had thus directly supported the rule of Rome, but still Antipas was Romes creature, and could hardly have been supported by truly religious patriots of the time. Even in Galilee the
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

profession of a tax-gatherer was despised, as we see on every page of the Gospels, and we cannot wonder that this was the case, for such a profession ran counter to the Messianic expectations of the time, and the moral character of those who adopted it was generally far from good ( <400546>Matthew 5:46, note). Yet St. Matthew became the type of the many government officials of all grades who have given up a morally doubtful, but a financially safe, position at the call of Christ. He reckoned his daily income and the opportunities that it gave of selfenrichment as nothing compared with the possibilities involved in following Christ. Whether he had heard Jesus before the call we do not know, but we may safely assume that it was so. His time would not be so fully occupied but that he could often have left his booth by the roadside ( <400209>Matthew 2:9, note), and listened to the words of him who spake as never man spake, and hear from the crowds the accounts of his miracles, even if he did not himself see some performed. But when he is called he rises up and follows Christ, and, both to celebrate his entrance on a new life and to give his friends a chance of hearing more of the Master whose service he is now about to enter, he makes a feast for him. Levi, he who cleaves to the old ways, dies; Matthew, the gift of Jehovah, henceforth lives instead. From his call until Pentecost his history is that of the greater number of the apostles. Nothing special is recorded of him. He attained not to the first three who were admitted to special privileges, and wore with the Lord when he raised the daughter of Jairus, and when a glimpse of the Possibilities of human nature was shown in the Mount of Transfiguration. Not a word of his is recorded in the Gospels, not a word or an action in the Acts. We may, indeed, reasonably suppose that he stayed with the other apostles in Jerusalem, and left it when they left it. But of the scene of his labours we know nothing for certain.

We may imagine him during the years that he spent at Jerusalem, and perhaps during the earlier part of the succeeding time, as confining his attention almost entirely to that section of Jews and Christians which spoke Aramaic, anti not Greek, and, further, as perhaps composing, or at any rate as having a share in composing, that form of instruction given in the Christian synagogues which dealt chiefly with the Lords sayings. There
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

was another cycle of teaching comprehending these sayings as arising out of some event what we have called the Framework but the aim of St. Matthew and of those associated with him was rather to collect those sayings of the Lord that bore on cognate subjects, regardless of the occasion upon which they were spoken. Later on, however, perhaps about
A.D

. 65, he realized that there was a large and increasing number of Jewish believers in Jesus of Nazareth who did not speak Aramaic, but Greek alone, and with whom a good many Gentile Christians commonly associated, and that it lay in his power to draw up for them a treatise which should help them to understand more of the person and the claims of Jesus and of the relation in which he stood to the Law of their fathers, the religion which as Jews they had professed. This treatise he felt it necessary to write in Greek. He used as his bases two chief sources, both probably not fully written down, but current in mens minds by dint of oral repetition the one traceable ultimately to St. Peter; the other that which was chiefly due to his own energy. But he now welded these two sources together, using his own judgment, and adding much that would serve his purpose, especially a genealogy hitherto preserved in oral tradition, and certain interpretations of prophecy that had been for some time in course of formation in the Church. He did not endeavour to be original, but the bent of his strong individuality could not fail to make itself felt.

10. THE MEANING OF THE PHRASE, THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN.

21. There is one phrase which occurs so often in St, Matthews Gospel that it demands special consideration, the kingdom of heaven ( ), or, as it is found elsewhere, the kingdom of God ( ). I shall not discuss the relation of the two genitives, and , but assuming that the former seemed to Gentile Christians to savour of heathenism, and for this reason became restricted to Jewish circles, I shall consider them as for our purpose identical. But what does kingdom mean? Some say rule in the abstract, and appeal to certain passages in the LXX. and New Testament for corroboration ( e.g.

2 Kings 24:12; <461524>1 Corinthians 15:24; <420133>Luke 1:33). But the general tenor of Scripture, both of the Old and of the New Testament, is strongly in favour of the concrete meaning, realm ( e.g. LXX.: <170122>Esther 1:22; <092817>1 Samuel 28:17 [probably]; <100328>2 Samuel 3:28; and in the Apocrypha, Wisd. 6:4; 10:10. New Testament: <400408>Matthew 4:8 [6:13, Received Text]; 12:25, 26; 16:28; 24:7). The word kingdom, that
<122412>

<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

is to say, does not mean the act of ruling, or the exercise of dominion, a reign, but a sphere ruled, a kingdom proper. But what does the phrase as a whole mean? What is the kingdom? What is the sphere ruled? To answer this it is essential to notice that the earliest passage in which the thought is found, and on which the whole conception rests ( <021906>Exodus 19:6), tells us that at Mount Sinai God offered to take the children of Israel to be to him a kingdom of priests . This position the nation accepted then and there, professing their readiness to obey Gods voice. f50 Their action may be illustrated by the remarks of a far later time. The Lord proved his right, say the rabbis of circa A . D . 230, to be King over Israel by his delivering them from Egypt and working miracles for them, and they gladly accepted him as King, and they all set one heart alike to accept the kingdom of heaven with joy. f51 Thus, when Hoses, one Rabbi Berechiah says, asked God why Israel alone out of all the nations was committed to his charge, the answer was, Because they took upon them the yoke of my kingdom on Sinai, and said All that the Lord hath spoken we will do, and be obedient ( <022407>Exodus 24:7).
f52

One can easily understand how the thought of the acceptance of this position as Gods kingdom would lead to the desire to frequently renew the acceptance. The dates of the ritual observances of the Jews are in most cases quite unknown, but it is certain that the recital of the Shma, Hear, O Israel, etc., the summary of the teaching of the Law, is pre-Christian, and it is probable that it has come clown from the very earliest times. But this recital was looked upon as the daily renewal, on the part of every individual Israelite, of his personal acceptance of the position accepted by the nation at Sinai. So that the recital of the Shma became commonly called, the taking of the yoke of the kingdom of heaven. By every recital of the Shma each Israelite pledged himself to do his best to work out his own share of the duties and responsibilities which belonged to him as a member of the kingdom. I do not wish, however, to lay too great stress either on the antiquity of the recital of the Shma or on the part it played in keeping up the thought of the kingdom;

for it admits of no question that the nation of Israel did not forget its position accepted at Sinai. Though its behaviour was very unlike that of the special kingdom of God, the nation never finally surrendered its idea], but felt pledged to attain it. For the prophets always looked forward to this ideal as to be fully carried out one day under Messiah ( e.g .
<230202>

Isaiah 2:2-4; Jeremiah 23. 5, 6), and indeed to be then still further
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

enlarged by the admission of others than Jews to the privileges of the kingdom ( e.g. Isaiah 45:23; 66:23; <360211>Zephaniah 2:11). The realm ruled over by Messiah became to the prophets a realm which was hereafter to be so completely realized that other realms, already in whole or in part existing, served only as the counterfoil to its greatness; for they were to be overcome by it (Daniel 2., 7.). It would be, observe, the realm of Messiah, the realm of a King, resembling, of course, not a Western kingdom with the constitutional rights of the representatives of the people to enforce limitations, but one of the great empires of the East, whose rulers were absolute monarchs. Nothing less than that is the biblical idea a realm ruled by Messiah as absolute King.
<234523>

This conception of the kingdom of God, though it might be more or less altered under different circumstances, continued to exist in Jewish circles during the period between the last of the prophets and the coming of Jesus, f53 and also afterwards. The study of the prophets could cause no less; and the ideal of the kingdom, an ideal to be realized at the coming of Messiah, has always been an integral part of Jewish belief. f54 It is the approach of the realization of this kingdom which John the Baptist announces. The brevity of the form in which his aunouncement has been recorded, The kingdom of heaven is at hand, seems to point to his purposely avoiding all mention of details. He states it in its bare simplicity, without hinting at its extension beyond the Jews (though he must have known the utterances of the prophets), yet, on the other hand, without limiting it in any way to them. The kingdom of heaven, Be simply says, is now at hand. We have been members of it, but we have realized the ideal of it most imperfectly; we have been unworthy subjects, notwithstanding our daily acceptance of our position as subjects. But now its realization is at hand. Arise to it, with preparation of heart. Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. Johns expectation, that is to say, of the kingdom was doubtless much the same as that of pious souls in Israel before him, and even of many non-Christian Jews after him. It was the expectation of a kingdom which was to be merely the realization of the old idea of Israel as the

kingdom of God, which was to take place in connexion with Messiah, and, in agreement with the expectation of the prophets, to include eventually many of the Gentiles. There is no hint that John the Baptist understood by the phrase any such thing as a distinct and new organization. Did our Lord? For his first proclamation was the same as Johns ( <400417>Matthew 4:17), Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. He
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

used a well-known term which had been understood in a definite meaning. No doubt he could have used it with a modified meaning so as himself to intend by it, though unknown at the time to his hearers, a separate organization. But is there any valid reason for supposing that he did so? It is undoubtedly prima facie the easier supposition. The mere fact that through the coming of Christ an organization began which has proved itself a mighty power in the world makes us inclined to think that this organization is directly meant by our Lords words; and to our practical and logical Western minds it is far easier to conceive the kingdom of God as a realm both organized and visible. In support of this prima facie supposition is urged the evidence of certain other sayings of our Lords. It is, for instance, often asserted that when our Lord says that the kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed or a dragnet, he means that the outward and visible organization, the Church, is like these objects. It is a very easy interpretation, but is it the right one? It is a serious matter to suppose that Christ altered the meaning of current phrase unless the case be fairly made out. What right have we to say that Christ in his parables compared a certain definite organization which he called the kingdom of heaven, with a mustard seed or a drag-net, when we may keep to the earlier meaning of the phrase by interpreting those parables as speaking solely of the principles connected with the establishment of the Divine realm, and of those principles taking effect in history? We must not allow the slowness of our Western imagination to prevent our catching the refined thoughts of Eastern pictures. Again, in support of the belief that by the phrase, the kingdom of heaven Christ intended the Church, appeal is made to <401618>Matthew 16:18, 19. It is said that the two terms are there used synonymously. But this is hardly so. Of the Church Christ affirms that it shall be founded on St. Peter and shall not be overcome by the gates of Hades (both phrases pointing to the personal meaning of Church), but of the kingdom of heaven Christ says that St. Peter is to be, as it were, its steward (of. <401352>Matthew 13:52), withholding or granting things in it as he likes. The phrase implies a sphere that includes more than persons only. The Church forms but a part of the kingdom of heaven. f55

Christ, then, accepted the usage that he found existing, and only enlarged it; he did not alter it. But as he looked down the ages, and saw multitudes of non-Jews accepting his message and obeying his commands, he knew that his kingdom was not intended to have a merely national limit, but that
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

it would stretch from sea to sea till it embraced the whole earth. The old idea was that the nation was to be the kingdom; Christ meant the kingdom to embrace the world. The Church, whatever view we take of it, is only a collection of persons. The kingdom of heaven includes persons and things. The ancient idea was that of a nation with all that belonged to it being the special realm of God. The completed idea is that of <661115>Revelation 11:15 (Revised Version), The kingdom of the world is become the kingdom of our Lord, and of his Christ; i.e. all that the world then contains of persons and things will be not merely possessed by God, or ruled as he rules it now, but, permeated with a spirit of submission to his rule, will correspond in will and action and use to its position, the present Church visible being only the training- school for the kingdom. f56 The Holy Empire expresses the idea more than the word Church, but it will be a Holy Empire, governed, not by a pope for an ecclesiastical and an emperor for a civil head, but by one God- Man, who contains in himself the source of all authority, alike civil and spiritual (cf., perhaps, <380613>Zechariah 6:13 and Psalm 110.). The kingdom of God is a much grander conception, because wider, than that of the Church, f57 harder far for us to grasp because its realization is so future, but full of promise for those who believe that every part of the material world, and every power of mind and act of hand or eye, is intended to be used for God, and has its place in his realm. Thus it is that the earliest proclamation of Christianity is not that of the Church. It is that of the kingdom of God, or, in probably still earlier phraseology, the kingdom of heaven.

11. A BRIEF PLAN OF THE GOSPEL.

22. Matthew 1., 2. Jesus is Messiah ( a ) by human inheritance; ( b ) by the fact that the circumstances of his birth and early life fulfil prophecy. Matthew 3-4:16. His entrance on the Messianic office.

<400417>

Matthew 4:17-16:20. Jesus as Teacher and as Worker. Opposition and acceptance seen in their growth. The climax (ch. <401613>Matthew 16:13-20) of recognition of his true nature by some,

<401621>

Matthew 16:21-25. Suffering: he accepts and does not shun it.

Matthew 26.-28. And thus enters upon his kingdom.

<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

12. CONCLUDING REMARKS.

It may save misunderstanding if I state once for all that, except in rare cases, I have not thought it worth while to reinvestigate questions of textual criticism. Westcott and Horts text has been accepted throughout as that which most nearly resembles the original Greek of the New Testament. The Received Text has been taken from Scriveners Novum Testamentum Graece , editio major , 1887. I have tried to work independently, and though I have used everything that came in my way, I have not cared to reproduce what may be found in the ordinary English commentaries. Of recent commentators, Weiss (especially in his edition of Meyer, 1883), Nosgen (in the Kurzgefasster Koinmentar, 1886), and Kubel (1889) have been the most helpful. Bruders Concordance, Winers Grammar (Moultons edition, 1870), Thayers Grimms Lexicon, are too well known to require further mention. Of course, Rushbrookes Synopticon (1880) is indispensable to all serious students of the Gospels. The references to the Septuagint have been taken from Dr. Swetes edition so far as that has been published, those to the Vulgate of Matthew from Wordsworth and Whites edition (1889). I cannot let these chapters go forth without expressing my thanks to the Rev. F. H. Chase, B.D., Principal of the Clergy Training School, Cambridge, for his untiring kindness in reading both the manuscript and the proof-sheets, and for making many most valuable suggestions. A. LUKYN WILLIAMS. HEBREW MISSIONARY COLLEGE, PALESTINE PLACE, N.E., April 24 th , 1892. I have never been able to consent with that which so often is asserted namely, that the Gospels are in the main plain and easy, and that all the chief difficulties of the New Testament are to be found in the Epistles. ARCHBISHOP TRENCH (Studies in the Gospels, Preface, March 8, 1867).

<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

FOOTNOTES
ft1

E.g. <400802> Matthew 8:2; 9:2, 5, 6, 12, 13, 17; 12:8, 49. The following example will give a clear idea of what is intended : Matthew 8:2, 3.

ft2

<400802>

And behold, there came to him a leper and worshipped him, saying, Lord, if thou wilt,, thou canst make me clean. And he stretched forth his hand, and touched him, saying, I will; be thou made clean. And straightway his leprosy was cleansed.
<410140>

Mark 1:40, 41.

And there cometh to him a leper, beseeching him, and kneeling down to him, and saying unto him, If thou wilt, thou canst make me clean, And being moved with compassion, he stretched forth his hand, and touched him, and saith unto him, I will; be thou made clean. And straightway the leprosy departed from him, and he was made clean.
<420512>

Luke 5:12, 18.

And it came to pass, while he was in one of the cities, behold, a man full of leprosy; and when he saw Jesus, he fell on his face, and besought him, saying, Lord, if thou wilt, thou canst make me clean. And he stretched forth his hand, and touched him, saying, I will; be thou made clean. And straightway the leprosy departed from him. The Triple Tradition may be studied most conveniently in Mr. Rushbrookes Synopticon (Macmillan, 1880); but those English readers who do not care about exactness of detail will perhaps find sufficient for their purpose in Abbott and Rushbrookes Common Tradition of the Synoptic Gospels (Macmillan, 1884).

ft3

First in the Encyclopaedia Britannica, edit. 9. vol. 10. (1879).

Thus the Triple Tradition, in its narrowest sense, hardly takes us into the narrative of the crucifixion; but, notwithstanding some transpositions in Luke, the basis of the three narratives of the crucifixion appears to be the same (of. Mr. F. H. Woods paper in Studia Biblica, 2., 1890).
ft4 ft5

a , b , and partly c may be conveniently studied in the Synopticon, pp.

171-197.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

ft6

I am not now concerned with the question whether the author of the

First Gospel may or may not have drawn up, perhaps long before, one or more of the sources, vide infra , 15.
ft7

Andrew, but his name does not occur in the Triple Tradition of this place.

Of. Dr. Salmon, Introduction (p. 153f, edit. 1888), whose mediate object, however. is to show the Petrine authorship of more than the Triple Tradition. I have thought it better to confine myself to this in the narrower sense of the word.
ft8 ft9

Eusebius, Ch. Hist, 3:39. For whom the Framework was originally composed is another question.

ft10

One phrase in it, the river Jordan. ( <400306>Matthew 3:6; <410105>Mark 1:5) for which there seems to be no parallel in Jewish writers suggests that in the form used as one of the sources of our Gospels ( vide infra ) it was intended for non-Palestinian, and in fact for Gentile, Christians (since all Jewish Christians would know what the Jordan was); but this is altogether too slight a point upon which to build an argument.
ft11

Vide inrfra , 14. He also (if and not be the right reading) speaks of

St. Peter preaching with reference to the immediate needs of his hearers, and not intending to give a consecutive record of the Dominical oracles ().
ft12

Mr. A. Wright gives a wrong impression of the bishops view when

(Composition of the Four Gospels, 1890, p. 66) he writes, The phrase, Utterances of the Lord, by which Papias designates the book [i.e. the second cycle of the apostolic teaching according to Mr. Wrights terminology], though it plainly indicates that discourses formed the distinctive feature, yet, as Bishop Lightfoot has shown (Essays reprinted from the

Contemporary Review ), does not preclude a .considerable intermixture of historical matter. This agrees more with the view of Dr. S. Davidson (Introd. New Test., 1:369, sq. , edit. 1882), who, while disagreeing with Bishop Lightfoots further conclusions, yet holds that the closely succeeding words about St. Peter, quoted in the preceding note, compel us to regard the Logia as more than discourses. He says, When Papias tells us that Matthew wrote the Logia , he means a work which contained the sayings and doings of Christ; and as the former predominated, the name took its origin from the principal part. But this is hardly sufficient.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

ft13

Thus the saying about divorce in <400532>Matthew 5:32 recurs in

Matthew 19:9; that about taking up ones cross in <401038>Matthew 10:38, in <401624>Matthew 16:24; that about the sign of Jonah in <401239> Matthew 12:39, in Matthew 16.; that about more being given to him that hath in <401312>Matthew 13:12. in <402529>Matthew 25:29.
<401909>

If it be argued that seine doublets occur even in the same source ( e.g. . the saying about offences in <400529>Matthew 5:29, 30 recurs in <401808> Matthew 18:8, 9; He that receiveth me, etc., in <401040>Matthew 10:40, perhaps in <401805>Matthew 18:5; the series of sayings about persecution in <401017>Matthew 10:17-22. in <402409>Matthew 24:9-14), and that the inference drawn above is therefore unsound, the answer is that the fresh facts only show that the source in which theme doublets occur is itself of composite origin.
ft14 ft15

Compare further, 12. A. Wright, The Composition of the Four Gospels, 1890, p. 1. Observe

ft16

Mr. Wrights opinion that the oral instruction was given, not by public preaching and teaching, but after the manner of school instruction. Jost. Geschichte des Judenthums und seiner Secten, 1:367. For reff. see Strack, loc. cit.; and comp. Levy, Neuhebr. und Chald. Worterbuch, 2:434.
ft17 ft18

For reference to cases where a document written in some kind of

Aramaic seems to underlie the variations in the Gospels, see 13. Cf. the variations noticed supra , p. 2. It must, however, be confessed that Dr. Plummers illustrations from Church chronicles, in the Expositor for July, 1889, make the theory of alteration from documents much easier to believe.
ft19 ft20

For an extraordinary example of powers of memory trained to remember long

passages verbatim , see Eusebius, Mart. Pal., 13. Godet (Luke 2., p. 444) says Basil the Great (De Sp. Sanct., 27. 66) affirms that in the fourth century the Church had no written Liturgy, but he probably misunderstands Basils language (see Mr. St. John Tyrwhitt, in Smiths Dictionary of Christian Antiquities, 2. p. 1007).
ft21

As may be seen from the quotations found in the Framework and the

Discourses. The passages that show most possibility of being due to an eye-witness are <401302>Matthew 13:2, on the beach and was standing (cf. notes); <401249>Matthew 12:49, stretched forth his hand; <402401>Matthew
ft22

<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

24:1, was going on his way (cf. Bishop Westcott, Expositor , third series, 5:249). It may be observed that the objections urged by Davidson (1. 386-390), consisting either in miraculous incidents or in difficulties of chronological order, are of little weight except to those who are prejudiced by unbelief in the miraculous, or who insist on a very crude interpretation of an evangelists duty.
ft22

Not necessarily in a written form (cf. 9).

Observe that this will include those quotations of the Old Testament which are taken from the LXX.
ft23 ft24

Upon this subject, cf. T. K. Abbott (Essays, p. 157: 1891), and

Roberts Greek the Language, etc., p. 816, edit. 1888. E.g . <400616>Matthew 6:16; 21:41. It is true that these are not absolutely conclusive, for paronomaaia in one language may sometimes be repeated in another, and translators occasionally even make them where they do not occur in the original ( <490209>Ephesians 2:9, 10; <590106> James 1:6, Authorized Version; <19D204>Psalm 132:4, 5, Prayer-book Version), but their presence adds weight to other arguments.
ft25 ft26 <402746>

Matthew 27:46, and perhaps <400123>Matthew 1:23. Matthew 27:15; 28:15.

ft27 <402715>

ft28

Yet cf. 17. Delitzsch (The Hebrew New Testament of the British and Foreign

ft29

Bible Society, p. 30: 1883) pleads hard for the original Semitic Gospel having been written, not in Aramaic proper, but in Hebrew, on the ground that this was still the holy language the language of the temple-worship, of synagogal and domestic prayer, of all the formulas of benediction, of the discussions between

the representatives of the traditional law. He also says that if a work were written in Aramaic it would be able to obtain a less wide circulation than one written in Hebrew, for Aramaic was only known in Palestine, but Hebrew more or less by all Jews. Yet he can hardly be right. Hebrew was so little known among the common people that the lessons from the Bible were translated verse by verse into Aramaic (cf. the references in Schurer, II. 2:81, notes 139, 140); and we have no mason to suppose, but quite the contrary, that the Jewish Christians ( i.e. those in Palestine, for whom, if for any one, St. Matthew wrote his Aramaic Gospel) belonged for the most part to other than the lowest classes. Dr. Roberts (Greek the Language, etc.) and Dr. T. K. Abbott (Essays) have proved that Greek was much more widely known in
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

Palestine than has been usually supposed, but Josephus testimony (Against Apion, 1:9) that he had to learn Greek in Rome, and that (Bell. Jud., Preface) he wrote his Wars of the Jews originally in Aramaic, seems to show conclusively that Aramaic was the mother tongue of Palestinian Jews. Besides, Delitzschs argument that a writing in Hebrew would have had wider circulation is hardly to the point. We know too little of St. Matthews aim in writing it (if he did write it) to be able to affirm that he intended it for those who were outside Palestine, The very fact that we have so little direct evidence of its existence tends to show that it originally had but a small circulation. It should be observed that the Aramaic spoken in Palestine was substantially that preserved in parts of the books of Ezra and Daniel, and in the Targums and the Jerusalem Talmud. Professor Marshall ( vide infra ) thinks that the Samaritan dialect of it was that which was used for the original Semitic Gospel. On the dialects of Western Aramaic, of especially Kautzsch, Grammatik des Biblisch- Aramaischen., 5; the late Dr. W. Wrights Comparative Grammar of the Semitic Languages, p. 16; and Mr. Bevans Daniel, p. 33 (1892). On the possibility that the Epistle of St. James was originally written in Aramaic, see Bishop J. Wordsworth, in Studia Biblica, 1:150. Among these are <400902>Matthew 9:2, 8 (see also <401042>Matthew 10:42, note). Resch (Agrapha, 1890) has much in the same direction, but he is hindered by trying to find an original Hebrew text, not an Aramaic, and his examples are seldom more than synonyms, and not real differences which are explicable by an original Shemitic term. The value of his work lies in his large collection of early Christian quotations of the Lords worth, canonical or otherwise.
ft30

Matqai~ov me<n ou+n Jebrai>di diale>ktw| ta< lo>gia sunegra>yato hJrmh>neuse de< aujta< wJv h+n dunato<v e[kastov (Eusebius, Ch. Hist., 3:39, Heinichen).
ft31

JO me<n dh< Matqai~ov ejn toi~v Jebrai>oiv th~| ijdi>a| diale>ktw| aujtw~n kai< grafh<n ejxh>negken (Haer., 3:1).
ft32

Wv ejn parado>sei maqw<n peri< tw~n tessa>rwn eujaggeli>wn a} kai< mo>na ajnanti>rjrJhta> ejstin ejn th~| . , (Eusebius, Ch. Hist., 6:25).
ft33

jO Pa>ntainov kai< eijv jIndou<v ejlqei~n le>getai e]nqa lo>gov euJrei~n aujto<n profqa>san th<n aujtou~ [arousi>an to< kata< Matqai~on eujagge>lion para> tisin aujto>qi to<n Cristo<n ejpegnwko>sin oi+v
ft34

<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

Barqolomai~on tw~n ajposto>lwn e[na khru~xai aujtoi~v te Jebrai>wn gra>mmasi th<n tou~ Matqai>ou katalei~yai grafh<n h}n kai< sw>zesqai eijv to<n dhlou>menon cro>non (Eusebius, Ch. Hist., 5:10.) Matqai~ov me<n ga<r pro>teron Jebrai>oiv khru>xav wJv h]melle kai< ejf eJte>rouv ije>nai patri>w| glw>tth| grafh~| paradou<v to< kat aujto<n eujagge>lion to< lei~pon th~| aujtou~ parousi>a| tou>toiv ajf w=n ejste>lleto dia< th~v grafh~v ajpeplh>rou (Eusebius, Ch. Hist., 3:24, Heinichen).
ft35 ft36

Quest. ad Marin., 2, 4. p. 94l (edit. Migne); see Bishop Lightfoots

Essays. p. 208.
ft37

In Moesingers edition of the Diatessaron, p. 286; vide Resch,

Agrapha, p. 271.
ft38

(Catech., 14). See Dr. Salmons Introduction, IX 168, edit. 1888.

ft39

De novo nunc loquor testamento, quod Graecum esse non dubium est, excepto apostolo Mattheo, qui primus in Judaea evangelium Christi Hebraeis literis edidit (Ep. ad Dam., A . D . 883: Wordsw. and Whites edition of the Vulgate, p. 2).
ft40

Primus omnium Mattheus est publicanus cognomento Levi, qui evangelium in Judea hebreo sermone edidit, ob eorum Tel maxime causam qui in Jesum crediderant ex Judaeis et nequaquam legis umbra succedente evangelii veritatem servabant (Prol. in Comm., Wordsw. and White, p. 12).
ft41

Salmon, p. 168, edit. 1888. Comp. Bishop Lightfoot on Ignatius, Smyrn., 3.

ft42

Cf. especially Mr. A. Wrights Composition of the Four Gospels, p. 67. It should be observed that this is not intended to exclude the possibility of his finding existing materials current in the Church. St. Matthew may only have edited a collection of the Lords utterances that had been growing up among Aramaic-speaking Christians.
ft43

Tregelles strongly insists (Smiths Dictionary of the Bible, 3:1623, sqq .) that we must accept the statements of Papias and other Fathers, and believe that (1) St. Matthew wrote the present Gospel in Hebrew; (2) some one (not St. Matthew) translated it, and the translation received apostolic sanction. But Tregelles wrote this before
ft44

<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

the interrelation of the synoptic Gospels was as clearly perceived as it is now. The Gospel according to the Hebrews has only come clown to us in fragments which have been preserved in Greek or Latin writers for the strangeness of their teaching, so that we have but a very imperfect knowledge of its general contents. The impression which the fragments give is that they are distinctly later than our sober canonical Gospels. The fragments are collected most conveniently in Bishop Westcotts Introduction, Appendix D; Nicholsons Gospel according to the Hebrews (1879); and Handmanns Das HebraerEvangelium (Leipzig, 1888).
ft45 ft46

Compare the Appendix published in Clement of Rome (ii. 509, edit.

1890). The date at which Bishop Lightfoot wrote this fragment, for it is hardly more, was, says the editor, apparently before the publication of Gebhardt and Harnacks edition of Barnabas (1878). Perhaps it was written in view of the accomplishment of his promise made in 1875, referred to in the next note.
ft47

(Barn., 4.). Bishop Lightfoot (Essays, p. 177; el. also his

Clement, 1:10, edit. 1890)writes as follows of this reference and another in 5. to <420513>Luke 5:13 ( <400913>Matthew 9:13, only in the Received Text): The Gospel of St. Matthew is twice quoted in the Epistle of Barnabas [ 4, 5], and in the first passage the quotation is introduced by the common formula of scriptural reference, as it is written. To what contortions our author [the author of Supernatural Religion ] puts his argument, when dealing with that epistle, in the vain attempt to escape the grip of hard fact, I shall have occasion to show when the proper time comes. At present it is sufficient to say that the only ground for refusing to accept St. Matthew as the source of these two quotations, which are found there, is the assumption that St. Matthew could not at this early date be regarded as Scripture. In other words, it is a petitio principii. B. Weiss (Introd. New Test., 1:36, Hodder and Stoughton, 1887) appears to

think that the author of the epistle did not quote the saying as from Matthew, but as from the Old Testament, by an error of memory (cf. also Bishop Westcott, Canon, p. 62, edit. 1881). For Weiss rejects the common rationalistic opinion that he took it from 4 Esdras 8:3 (cf. Davidson, Introd. 1:368). With this quotation by Barnabas may be compared two passages in 2 Clem., 2. ( A . D . 130<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

150),where the words, I came not to call the righteous, but sinners ( <410217>Mark 2:17, or perhaps <400913>Matthew 9:13), are introduced by the formula, , and 13., where the saying found in <420632>Luke 6:32, 35 is introduced by , marking it as one of referred to only five lines before ( vide Bishop Lightfoot, in loc ). I have not seen Mr. Halcombes works on the Gospels, but I cannot believe that St. John is the earliest of all
ft48

It is just possible that the words, Herod the king in ch. 2:1 my point to a date before Agrippa II. was made king , i.e. before A . D . 53, when he received, in exchange for the small kingdom of Chaleis, a much larger kingdom north-east of Jordan, or perhaps to A . D . 56, when his kingdom was enlarged by parts of Galilee and Peraea ( vide Schurer, 1. 2:193, sqq .).
ft49

By the solemn conclusion of the covenant at Sinai (Exodus 24.), Israel became the people of God, and he became their King. It is from this relation, for which Josephus (Contra Apion, 2:17) introduced the name theocracy , that the whole conception of the Kingdom of God has arisen (Professor T. S. Candlish, The Kingdom of God, p. 52: Edinburgh, 1884).
ft50 ft51

Comp. Midrash, Mechilta, 5, p. 74a, edit. Weiss.

Midrash, Pesikta (p. 17a, edit. Buber); ef. for a somewhat similar saying, Midrash Shmoth Rabba, 23 (beginning).
ft52 ft53

Especially Psalms of Solomon, 17., 18. (cf. by all means Ryle and

James edition, pp. 52. - 58.: Cambridge, 1891). See further Stanton, The Jewish and the Christian Messiah, ch. 3.: Edinburgh, 1886. Cf. Maimonides, The King Messiah will in some future time come, furore the kingdom of David to its former power, build the Temple, bring together the scattered of Israel will reform all mankind, and lead them to the unanimous
ft54

service of God (quoted in Friedlanders Jewish Religion, pp. 226, 227: Kegan Paul, 1891). Apoc. 1:6 is more to the point (He made us a kingdom, priests to God and his Father) for in this ease it must be confessed that St. John limits the word to the most important part of the contents of the kingdom the persons who are in it.
ft55 ft56

Oosterzee, in Candlish, The Kingdom of God, p. 403.

Ephesians 1:23, The Church which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all only confirms this. The Church is not called the
ft57 <490123>

<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

totality of all things directly, but the totality of the Lords powers and attributes. In other words, the apostle is there speaking of the union of persons with the One Person, to whose all-pervading and all-sustaining work the end of the clause alludes.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

MATTHEW
CHAPTER 1.
EXPOSITION.
Vers. 1-17. JESUS THE CHRIST BY HUMAN ANCESTRY, (Parallel passage: <420323>Luke 3:23-38.) Ver. 1. f1 The book of the generation . As St. Matthew was writing only for Jews, and they, by reason of their Old Testament prophecies, looked for the Messiah to be born of a certain family, he begins his Gospel with a pedigree of Jesus. In this he mentions, by way of introduction, the two points to which his countrymen would have special regard the descent of Jesus from David, the founder of the royal line, him in whose descendants the Ruler of Israel must necessarily ( <100713>2 Samuel 7:13-16) be looked for; and also from Abraham, who was the head of the covenant nation, and to whom the promise had been given that in his seed all the nations of the earth should bless themselves ( <012218>Genesis 22:18; 12:3). After this he proceeds to fill up the intervening steps in the genealogy. The spelling of the names in the Authorized Version accords with the Greek, and so varies from the Old Testament orthography; but for the sake of the English reader it is certainly advisable to do what has been done in the Revised Version, viz. to conform the spelling to that of the Old Testament, and, where the Greek varies much, to put that form in the margin. It is better to write Rahab than Raehab , and Shealtiel than Salathiel. Those who read the Greek Gospels when these were first written read also the Old Testament in Greek, and so were in no confusion. The first verse of the Gospel is doubtless intended as a preface to what is contained in vers. 2-17. It is, indeed, true that the phrase, the book of the generation ( bi>blov gene>sewv , equivalent to sepher toledoth , Genesis 5.1), might in itself point rather to events and works connected with the active life of him

whose name it precedes (cf. the use of toledoth in <010501>Genesis 5:1; 6:9; 10:1; even 2:4, et al. ) , a nd thus might refer to the whole of ch. 1. (Kubel), or even the whole of the First Gospel (Keil); yet the addition of the Son of David, the Son of Abraham , by summarizing the genealogy, limits the reference of ver. 1 to this alone. Observe
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

(1) that the same word ( ge>nesiv ) recurs in ver. 18; but being without bi>blov , has a slightly different meaning; (2) that the word translated generation in ver. 17 is gene>a , and means a single stratum of human life. The evangelist uses the name Jesus Christ here as a proper name, customary in later Christian circles (cf. <430117>John 1:17, and especially the traces of development from <461203>1 Corinthians 12:3 and <451009>Romans 10:9 to <503211>Philippians 2:11). Christ is not used in its signification of Messiah, or Anointed, till ver. 17, where it would be better rendered the Christ. Ver. 2. Abraham begat Isaac . From Abraham to David the genealogy in St. Matthew agrees with that in Luke 3. In the other two sections, from Solomon to Zerubbabel, and from Zerubbabel to Christ, there is some difficulty in accounting for the variations, which are considerable. The natural descent of each son from his father is emphasized by the repetition of the word begat at every stage (cf., however, ver. 8, note) till we come to Jesus, and then the phrase is varied, Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus. Judas ( Judah , Revised Version) and his brethren . The addition of these words seems very natural here, because the twelve sons of Jacob were the fathers of the tribes of Israel, and as descended from Abraham were heirs of the promises; and although Judah was the tribe from which the Messiah was to spring, he was to be the glory of the whole of Israel. The same words, and his brethren, are, however, found in ver. 11, where there is no such reason to account for them. Ver. 3. Of Thamar ( Tamer , Revised Version). In this genealogy the only women mentioned beside the Virgin Mary herself, who must of necessity be introduced, are Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, and Bathsheba, and many explanations have been suggested why these should be specially singled out for notice. The most plausible reasons put forward have been that they are introduced because of the sins with which all but one of them were stained, and because two were not of the race of Israel. Thus, it has been thought, St. Matthew would, in the outset of his Gospel, proclaim Christ as the Friend, even the Kinsman, of sinners, and the Saviour offered to Gentiles as well as to Jews. It is probably wiser not to put so

deep a meaning on the appearance of these names, but to consider that they are here because in each case the circumstances were different from the ordinary steps of the genealogy. Had they been in the same position as all the other wives and mothers who are unnamed, they also would have been left unnamed.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

Ver. 4. And Naasson ( Nahshon , Revised Version) begat Salmon . This line of descent, from Nahshon to David, is also given by St. Luke ( <420331>Luke 3:31, 32), and is derived from <080418>Ruth 4:18-22. But it has occasioned some difficulty, because it makes but five steps from Nahshon, who ( <040107>Numbers 1:7) was one of the heads of fathers houses at the time of the Exodus, to the days of David. According to the chronology added in the margin of the Authorized Version, this period extended from B . C . 1490 to B . C . 1056, i.e. more than four hundred and thirty years, thus making a generation to consist in each case of more than eighty years. And even according to the more accurate computation of the date of the Exodus ( B . C . 1304) the period would be two hundred and forty-eight years, thus making each generation nearly fifty years. Even this seems very long, especially in the East; so that it is probable that the genealogy in Ruth, merely adopted by the evangelists, recorded only the more important names. Ver. 5. Salmon begat Booz ( Boaz , Revised Version) of Rachab ( Rahab , Revised Version). That this was Rahab of Jericho has been generally received, and it is clear from the narrative in <060211>Joshua 2:11, where Rahab declares, The Lord your God, he is God in heaven above, and on earth beneath, that, whatever this womans previous life and character may have been, she was then not unlikely to join herself to the Israelites. Moreover, her great services rendered to the spies, and the conspicuous way in which she and her house were singled out for preservation from all the rest of the city, may have .marked her as not unfit to become the wife of a chief man in Israel. The Old Testament says nothing of this marriage, but there has been no endeavour made in the Bible to preserve every detail of the genealogies, the record of the successive fathers being all that for Jewish purposes was required. But that Rahab of Jericho was received among the people of Israel, not merely as one dwelling in their midst ( <060625>Joshua 6:25), but to a place of honour among them, was an old tradition among the Jews; cf. T. B. Meg., 14 b ( vide Lightfoot, Her. Hebr.), where Neriah, Baruch, Seraiah, Maaseiah, Jeremiah, Hilkiah, Hanameel, and Shallum, and also Huldah, are all said to have sprung from her. Some also say that she was made a proselyte, and was married to Joshua a tradition followed, as it seems,

in the Midrash Koh., on <210810>Ecclesiastes 8:10. Ver. 6. David the king . The mention of Davids royal position seems made here because at this point the line of the Messiah first becomes connected with the royal house. At the time when Saul was made king the
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

people chose to have him in opposition to the Divine will; but giving them next as king a man after his own heart, God uses the offence of his people so that it shall become a channel of blessing, and from this king Christ himself shall be born. Of her that had been the wife of Urias. It is not easy to see why Bathsheba is spoken of thus indirectly, as her own name was certainly better known, and is more frequently mentioned in the Old Testament than Uriahs. The phrase seems to call attention most pointedly to Davids sin. and that too in a sentence where his kingly dignity has just been markedly emphasized. The way in which God dealt with David and his sin is very parallel to that in which he dealt with the Israelites after their choice of Saul. Davids first child, like the Israelites first king, finds not Gods blessing; but the second child is the pledge of peace with God (Solomon) is Jedidiah, the beloved of the Lord, as David the second king was the man after Gods own heart. She that had been the wife of Uriah, after Davids repentance becomes Solomons mother. Up to this point the genealogies in St. Matthew and St. Luke have entirely accorded, but with the mention of Solomon we come upon a variation, which continues till the union of the two forms of the pedigree in Salathiel ( Shealtiel , Revised Ver-zion), the father of Zerubbabel. In St. Matthew the line which is followed is the succession of the kings of Judah from Solomon to Jehoiachin ( Jechonias ) . St. Luke mentions, after David, his son Nathan (of whom we find a notice in <130305>1 Chronicles 3:5; <100514>2 Samuel 5:14), and then passes on through a series of nineteen names, none of which is found in other parts of Scripture as belonging to the race of David. We have nothing, therefore, with which to compare them; but in number they correspond very nearly with the known descendants in the line of Solo,non, so that, although we cannot verify the names, the list bears upon its face the appearance of being derived from some duly kept record of the pedigree of Nathan, the son of David. Ver. 8. And Joram begat Ozias ( Uzziah , Revised Version). Between Joram and Uzziah the pedigree omits three names Ahaziah immediately succeeded Joram ( <120824>2 Kings 8:24), and was followed by his son Joash ( <121201>2 Kings 12:1), and he by his son Amaziah ( <121401>2 Kings 14:1). These were probably left out, that the number of generations might be reduced to

fourteen. It is not likely that St. Matthew omitted them, but that they were absent from the form which he used. If we seek for a reason why these precise names are omitted, we may probably find it in the fact of their being descended from Jezebel; while the language of the second commandment would suggest that to the fourth generation the children of that race would suffer for the sins of their parents. To the Jewish compiler of this
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

genealogy no argument more forcible for the removal of these names could have been suggested. It will be seen that the word begat in these verses does not signify always the direct succession of son to father. Ver. 11. Josias ( Josiah , Revised Version) begat Jechonias ( Jechoniah , Revised Version). Here we come upon another omission. Josiah was the father of Jehoiakim, and he the father of Jechoniah (called also Jehoiachin); see 2 Kings 23:34; 24:6. The omission is supplied in some few manuscripts; but it may be only the case of a marginal note in a previous copy having found its way into the text. There is, however, something to be said in favour of its acceptance. The similarity between the names Jehoiakim and Jehoiachin is very great, especially in some of the Greek forms, so that they might easily be confused, and thus a verse be omitted in some very early text. Then Jehoiachin (Jechonias) apparently had no brethren (but see <130316>1 Chronicles 3:16), whereas Jehoiakim, the son of Josiah, had two or three ( <130315>1 Chronicles 3:15). To make the whole pedigree agree with the Old Testament records some addition in this form would appear necessary; Josiah begat [ Jehoiakim and his brethren , and Jehoiakim begat ] Jechoniah about the time , etc. But manuscript evidence for this is extremely slight ( vide Westcott and Hort, App., i,). Yet the supposition that the name of Jehoiakim has been omitted removes what has seemed to many another difficulty. As the list now stands, to make up the fourteen in the third as well as in the second section of the genealogy it is necessary to count Jehoiachin a king whose reign lasted only three mouths ( <122408>2 Kings 24:8) twice over. He closes the second fourteen and begins the third. There is nothing like this found at the other division. To substitute Jehoiakim after Josiah would avoid this repetition of the name of such a very insignificant person, especially as the reign of Jehoiakim lasted eleven years (2 Kings 23:36). And to mention Jehoiakim as the father of Jehoiachin at the time of the carrying away to Babylon would be very appropriate, whereas to say Josiah begat his children at that date is not so strictly correct. It seems, then, probable that we have here some clerical error, which may have existed already in the list which St. Matthew used. About the time. The preposition in the Greek means rather, at the time. The Authorized Version, however, gives the sense, for the birth of Jehoiachin must have been

some years before the commencement of the Babylonish conquest, which may be said to have begun with Nebuchadnezzars invasion of the land in Jehoiakims . days ( <122401>2 Kings 24:1).
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

Ver. 12. Jechonias begat Salathiel ( Sheal-tiel , Revised Version). From <242230>Jeremiah 22:30 it has sometimes been thought that Jechoniah died childless, though the preceding context, which speaks of him and his seed, seems hardly to warrant the supposition; but clearly the words of the prophet there imply that none of his descendants should attain to a position such as was held by Zerubbabel, and that his family should soon come to an end. If we look at the genealogy in <130317>1 Chronicles 3:17 we find Assir mentioned as the son of Jechoniah (cf., however, Revised Version, Jeconiah the captive ), and Salathiel as his son; and in the next verse Pedaiah, a brother of Salathiel, is named as father of Zerubbabel. By St. Luke (3:27) Salathiel is called the son of Neri, and in <150302>Ezra 3:2; 5:2; and <370101> Haggai 1:1 Zerubbabel is called the son of Shealtiel. These are all the details we have, and to decide on how they are related to each other is very difficult. We.may, perhaps, be right in supposing that Pedaiah, the brother of Shealtiel, having died, his son Zerubbabel was adopted by Shealtiel. We must then suppose that, the royal line through Solomon having ended, and Jechoniahs only child, Assir (if he ever existed, vide supra ) , having left no issue, the line of David is taken up through the family of the other son, Nathan, and that from him descended Neri, the father of Shealtiel, who takes the place of Jechoniahs issue, which has altogether failed. Ver. 13. And Zorobabel ( Zerubbabel , Revised Version) begat Abiad . Here the two lines of pedigree in St. Matthew and St. Luke seem tc separate, and not to converge again till we come to Matthan (or Matthat), the grandfather of Joseph, which name is common to both. The Bishop of Bath and Wells has shown some reason for supposing that Rhesa , mentioned in St. Luke as Zerubbabels son, is merely a title signifying a chief, and also for identifying Hananiah, who is called a son of Zerubbabel ( <130319>1 Chronicles 3:19), with Joanna, who follows Rhesa in St. Luke ( <420327>Luke 3:27), and there being some relation between the Juda of St. Luke and the Abiud (i.e. father of Juda) given as Zerubbabels son in St. Matthew. Except in these few particulars, the two lines show no connexion of names, and it seems likely that the family of David had fallen into low estate for several generations before the birth of Christ.

Ver. 15. Eleazar begat Matthan . St. Luke makes Matthat (or Hatthan; the names are from the same root, and in some texts are .identical), to be the son of Levi. This is probably the actual fact. St. Luke seems to have traced the genealogy from Zerubbabel through a younger, son, St. Matthew through an elder. But the elder line failing, Matthan, the son of Levi, of the younger branch, becomes heir to, and is called son or, Eleazar,
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

of the senior line. As the promise of the Messiah was to the house of David, and this was known to every Jew, we need not be surprised to find the families descended from that king preserving most careful records of every branch of the family. Ver. 16. And Jacob begat Joseph, the husband of Mary . St. Luke calls Joseph the son of Heli. There are two ways in which these differing statements may be made to accord. The two sons of Matthan were Jacob the elder, and Heli the younger. It may be that Mary was the only child of Jacob, and Joseph the son of Heli. Then by marriage with his cousin, Joseph would become Jacobs son as well as Helis. Or it may be that Jacob died without children, and Heli, marrying his widow according to the Jewish usage, became by her the father of Joseph, who hence would be called Jacobs son, that the elder brothers line might not die out. The points noticed above in respect of these varying pedigrees seem to be all those on which anything needs to be said with the view of comparing them. Their variety stands as a constant evidence of the independence of the two evangelists. Had either of them been conscious of the existence of the others work. it is inconceivable that he would have made no effort to adjust the pedigree, for which he would possess means now lost for ever. They both design to give us the descent of Joseph from David, this being what a Sew would most regard. The descent of Mary from David is nowhere definitely mentioned in the Gospels, but that Jesus was sprung from David on the mothers side too we are warranted in concluding from the words of the angel to Mary ( <420108>Luke 1:82), his father David (cf. also Delitzsch, Hess. Proph., 17). But though we ought not to spend vain labour in attempting to reconcile these two genealogies of Joseph, we can see, from what we know of Jewish customs, grounds enough for understanding how these variations came to exist. The same Jew, we find, was often known under two names; of this we have several examples in the lists of the twelve apostles. It is possible, therefore, that in these two pedigrees there may have been more points of union than we are able to detect. Then the rule, before alluded to, by which a man took the childless widow of his deceased brother for his wife and raised seed unto his brother, may also have led to much confusion of names, which we have now no means of unravelling. The evangelists drew each his own list from some authentic source,

accessible to others beside themselves, and the record of which could be verified when the Gospels were set forth. This should satisfy us that those we have received were held by the Jews soon after Christs time to be truthful records, and that each established from a Jewish point of view the descent of the putative father of Jesus from King
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

David. Of whom was born Jesus . This name, which, through Jeshua , is the Greek form of Joshua (for which, indeed, it stands in the Authorized Version of <440745>Acts 7:45 and <580408>Hebrews 4:8), signifies Jehovah is help, and was not an uncommon name among the Jews, though given with marked significance at this time (see ver. 21). We find, according to the best texts, that in <420329>Luke 3:29 this name occurs in the pedigree of Joseph (where the Authorized Version has Jose), and the Revised Version has adopted that reading. (Of the way in which the name was augmented when given to the famous successor of Moses, see <041316>Numbers 13:16.) Who is called Christ . The evangelist here alludes merely to the well-known fact that Jesus was called by this name. The significance of the word, which is a translation of the Hebrew Messiah , is anointed, and in the Old Testament it is given to priests (as <030403>Leviticus 4:3, 5, 16), to a king appointed by Jehovah ( <092406>1 Samuel 24:6, 10; <101921>2 Samuel 19:21), also to King Cyrus ( <234501>Isaiah 45:1), and to some unnamed representative of Jehovah ( <090210>1 Samuel 2:10). It was subsequently applied to Jesus both in the Greek form and in the Hebrew ( <430141>John 1:41; 4:25). It must, however, be noticed ( vide Bishop Westcott, Add. Note on <620501>1 John 5:1) that it was not a characteristic title of the promised Saviour in the Old Testament, and was not even specifically applied to him, unless, perhaps, in <270925>Daniel 9:25, 26 a passage of which the interpretation is very doubtful. Ver. 17. Fourteen generations . To make the list more easy to remember, the names were so ordered that there should be the same number in each of the three divisions. Thus a means was afforded of checking the correctness of the enumeration, and the list became a sort of memoria technica. Unto Christ; better here, unto the Christ. For now begins the history which tells of this Jesus as the specially Anointed One of God, the true Messiah, of which all the previously anointed messengers had been but types and figures. The history which St. Matthew is about to give demonstrates that in Jesus were fulfilled the prophecies of the Old Testament which the Jews had constantly referred to the Messiah, for whose appearance the pious in Israel were ever looking.

Vers. 18-25. JESUS THE CHRIST BY DIVINE ORIGIN. Recorded by Matthew only. The frequent similarity of language found in <420126>Luke 1:2635 ( vide Synopticon ) is probably due to the fact that Joseph and Mary not unnaturally fell into the way of using the same words to express two messages of similar import.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

The object of this paragraph is to show that Messiah was in origin not of man but of God. This fact was accepted even by his reputed father Joseph, who was only convinced of it after a special communication by an angel in a dream; giving him the facts of the case, and foretelling that a son would be born, and that this Son would be the expected Saviour; and also showing from prophecy that such union of God with man was no unheard- of supposition, but the fulfilment and completion of ancient thought suggested by God. Joseph at once accepts the communication and takes Mary home, avoiding, however, all cause for the supposition that the child was, after all, of human origin. Ver. 18. Now the birth (ver. 1, note). Ge>nnhsiv (generation) of the received text refers to the causative act, the true reading ( ge>nesiv ) to the birth itself (cf. <420114>Luke 1:14). Of Jesus Christ was on this wise . The Revised Version margin says, Some ancient authorities read, of the Christ, but perhaps the reading, of Christ Jesus (B [Origen]), is even preferable, as in no good manuscript of the New Testament is the article elsewhere prefixed to Jesus Christ, and the easy residing, of the Christ, would hardly provoke alteration, while it might easily arise from assimilation to the preceding unto the Christ of ver. 17 (cf. Dr. Hort, in Westcott and Hort, Appendix. Bishop Westcott, however, seems to prefer the reading. of the Christ, and so distinctly Irenaeus, 3:16). If the reading, of Christ Jesus, be accepted, the evangelist purposely repeats his phrase of ver. 17, and then identifies him with the historic Person. When as . The Revised Version omits as because obsolete; cf. what time as. His mother Mary was espoused to Joseph ; had been betrothed (Revised Version), the tense clearly showing that the betrothal had already taken place. Betrothal was and is with the Semitic races a much more formal matter than with us, and as binding as marriage; of. <052223>Deuteronomy 22:23, 24; cf. also the words of the angel, Mary thy wife (ver. 20). Before they came together ; including, probably, both the home-bringing (ver. 24) and the consummation (ver. 25). She was found ( euJrw>qh ). Although Cureton (Corp. Ign., p. 271) shows that the Aramaic equivalent is used in the sense of became, and wishes to see this weaker meaning in several passages of the Greek Testament (including, apparently, the present), the references that he gives

( <450710>Romans 7:10; <470503>2 Corinthians 5:3; 11:12) do not justify us in giving up the stronger and more usual sense. On euJre>qh always involving more or less prominently the idea of a surprise, cf. Bishop Lightfoot on <480217>Galatians 2:17. Observe the reverent silence with which a whole stage of the history is passed over. With child
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

of the Holy Ghost ( ejk Pneu>matov JAgi>ou ; cf. ver. 20, without the article in both cases). According to the usual interpretation of these words, the Holy Ghost refers to the Third Person of the Trinity, and of ( ejk ) is used because the agent can be regarded as the immediate source (cf. <470202>2 Corinthians 2:2). But the questions suggest themselves: (1) whether Pneu~ma [Agion is here used in a strictly Christian or in a preChristian sense? and (2) if the latter, what was this pre-Christian sense? As to (1), it may be argued that the evangelist himself, writing long after Pentecost, and recording sayings taught among Christians only alter Pentecost, would naturally wish his words to be understood in a Christian sense; and hence that Pneu~ma [Agion here has at least that comparatively developed doctrine of the Personality of the Holy Ghost which we find indicated in the New Testament; e.g. Matthew 28:19; <471313>2 Corinthians 13:13; John 14.-16. It may, however, be justly replied that the words are in themselves rather a record of the feelings of Joseph and Mary about the Incarnation, and are merely a translation of the phrase Ruah-hakodesh (or its Aramaic equivalent, Ruah Kudsha ) , which they themselves used; and that hence its true meaning here must be rather sought in the meaning of the Semitic phrase in pre-Christian times. In other words, Pneu~ma[Agion here means neither more nor less than Ruah-hakodesh meant on the lips of a godly and instructed Jew before the teaching of Christ, and especially before Pentecost.
<402819>

(2) What was this pre-Christian sense? What did R uah-hakodesh mean? To answer this fully would be to compile a treatise on one of the most difficult and disputed points of Old Testament and early Jewish theology. But a cursory comparison of passages in the Old Testament and the pre-Christian writings seems to show that, though there are many places which quite fall in with the Trinitarian view, and which are often marked by strong personification of the Spirit ( e.g.

Isaiah 63:10-14; cf. further App. A. in Dr. Sharpes The Tree of Life, Cambridge, 1889), religious Jews did not understand by Ruah-hakodesh a permanent and distinct hypostasis in the Deity, but rather the Deity itself in relation to the world as the Source and Maintenance of its life ( <183304>Job 33:4; <19A430>Psalm 104:30; <183414>Job 34:14; <19D907> Psalm 139:7; <236310>Isaiah 63:10; cf. Wisd. 1:7; 12:1), in contrast to the Deity absolutely and as the object of worship. Pre-Christian thought, that is to say, used the term Holy Spirit as designating the One God in a certain relation to the world, not as designating a permanent and real distinction in
<236310>

<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

the Godhead. If this be so, we must understand the phrase here to mean that Christ was conceived of God (not of any Person in the Godhead) in contrast to man. We may, perhaps, even give to ejk its fullest meaning of origin (cf <430113>John 1:13, oujk ejxaiJma>twn ... ajll ejk Qeou~ ). The phrase as a whole thus only insists that the Child was by origin Divine. It will be noticed that <420135>Luke 1:35 is then closely parallel, the Holy Ghost ( Pneu~ma [Agion ) there apparently connoting an outpouring of life; the power of the Most High ( du>namiv uJyi>stou ), an outpouring of strength. Dorner (System., 3:343; cf. 162, etc.) says that the expression in our text is the less precise ancient Christian designation of the Divine Essence generally, out of which ( de quo ) Christ has come. To the Holy Spirit in the Trinitarian sense is only to be ascribed, according to the Scriptures, first, the internal preparation of humanity for the Divine Incarnation, and, secondly, after the Unio the animation of the humanity of Christ by the Divine power issuing from the Logos. The passage in Martensens Dogmatics, 139, so well known for its latter part, apparently agrees with this: He is born not of the will of a man, nor of the will of the flesh; but the holy will of the Creator took the place of the will of man and of the will of the flesh, that is, the creating Spirit, who was in the beginning, fulfilled the function of the plastic principle. He was born of the Virgin Mary, the chosen woman in the chosen people. It was the task of Israel to provide, not, as has been often said, Christ himself, but the mother of the Lord; to develop the susceptibility for Christ to a point when it might be able to manifest itself as the pro-foundest unity of nature and spirit a unity which found expression in the pure virgin. In her the pious aspirations of Israel and of mankind, their faith in the promises, are centred; she is the purest point in history and in nature, and she, therefore, becomes the appointed medium for the new creation. Observe that the Greek Creeds ( sarkwqe>nta [ gennhqe>nta , Marcellus] ejk Pneu>matov JAgi>ou kai< Mari>av th~v Parqe>nou ) , by not inserting the article (contrast afterwards kai< eijv to<Pveu~ma to< [Agion ) , probably intended only to reproduce St. Matthews language. The Latin could not fail to be ambiguous (de Spiritu Sancto ) . If, however, we divest ourselves of considerations directly derived

from exegesis, and, turning to the theological side, ask which Person of the Blessed Trinity, in fact, prepared Mary for the Incarnation of the Second Person, we must undoubtedly answer that it was the Third Person. For this is his peculiar function, uniting alike the Persons in the Godhead and also the Godhead to creation (cf. Dorner, System., 1:425,437; 4:159, etc.).
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

Ver. 19. Then Joseph her husband ; and (Revised Version). The thought is slightly adversative ( de> ); though this was of the Holy Ghost, yet Joseph was about to put her away. Being a just man; righteous (Revised Version); i.e. who strove to conform to the Divine precepts manifested for him in the Law (cf. <420106>Luke 1:6; 2:25). And not willing; i.e. and yet not wishing , though the Law, which he was striving to follow, seemed to inculcate harshness. This clause has been taken in the opposite sense equivalent to and therefore not wishing, because the spirit of the Law, which he had learned to understand, was in reality against all unnecessary harshness. The negative used (if it can be at all insisted upon; cf. Simcox, Language of the New Testament, p. 188) is in favour of the former interpretation. To make her a public example ; rather, to proclaim her (Wold not pupplische her, Wickliffe); avery aujth<n deigmati>sai (cf.
<510215>

Colossians 2:15). The thought is of public proclamation of the fact of the divorce, not that of bringing Mary herself forward for public punishment, and so making her a public example ( paradeigmati>sai ) . Was minded ( ejboulh>qh ). The tense indicates the resolution come to as the result of the conflict between duty and wish implied in the preceding clause. To put her away secretly . Adopting the most private form of legal divorce, and handing the letter to her privately in presence of only two witnesses, to whom he need not communicate his reasons (cf. Edersheim, Life, 1:154). Observe in this verse Josephs insistance on his personal and family purity, and yet his delicate thoughtfulness for her whom he loved. Ver. 20. But while he thought on these things ; when (Revised Version); tau~ta de<aujtou~ ejnqumhqe>ntov . The tense lays stress, not on the continuance of his meditation (contrast <441019>Acts 10:19), but on the fact that the determination to which he had already come ( vide supra ) was already in his mind at the time when the following event happened. These things; his determination and its causes. Behold ; unexpectedly. Though common in St. Matthew, it never lacks the connotation of surprise. The angel of the Lord ; an angel of the Lord (Revised Version). In Marys case it was the angel Gabriel ( <420126>Luke 1:26); but here not defined (so in

Matthew 2:13, 19; <420111>Luke 1:11; 2:9). (On angels, of especially Dorner, System., 2:96.) Appeared unto him in a dream . Joseph received his communications by dream ( <400213>Matthew 2:13,19, 22); to Mary, doubtless the more holy person, the vision was vouchsafed to her bodily eyes. If Joseph, as seems probable, was old, we here have a beginning of the fulfilment of the promise concerning Messianic times, Your old men shall dream dreams ( <290228>Joel 2:28). Saying, Joseph, thou
<400213>

<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

son of David . In reminding Joseph of the greatness of his ancestry, the angel probably desired (1) to accept Josephs resolution as right in so far as Joseph knew the circumstances, because with the promise of <100712>2 Samuel 7:12-16 there was special need to keep the line pure; (2) but, under the true circumstances, to urge him to take Mary, that so the promise might be fully carried out in his family and no other. Fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife (ver. 15, note). For that which if conceived in her (borun, Wickliffe; quod natum est , Vulgate); Gr. begotten (Revised Version margin), for gennhqe>n generally refers to the father rather than the mother (yet see <401111>Matthew 11:11), and here lays special stress on the Divine origin. Is of the Holy Ghost . Of Spirit (not flesh), and that the Holy Spirit ( ejk Pneu>mato>v ejstin JAgi>ou ) (ver. 18, note). Ver. 21. The first half is almost verbally identical with the promise to Mary in <420131>Luke 1:31. It is, perhaps, hypercritical to see anything more than a coincidence when such common terms are used, but it was not unnatural that the communications of the angels to both Mary and Joseph should be purposely clothed in language similar to that used of Sarah ( <011719>Genesis 17:19), and in measure to that used of Hannah ( <090120>1 Samuel 1:20; cf. Gretillat, Theologie Systematique, p. 225; 1890). And she shall bring forth . Is the slight adversative force ( de> ) to be seen in the contrast of the physical birth to the spiritual origin? A Son . In this, at least, thou shalt be able to test the accuracy of my statement. And thou shalt call . Taking the position of his father; the child being thus recognized by all as of Davids line (of. Kubel). In Luke Mary is told to give the name, but presumably the formal naming would be by Joseph. His name JESUS (cf. Ecclus. 46:1, Jesus the son of Nave who, according to his name, was made great for the saving of the elect of God). For he shall save ; for it is he that shall save (Revised Version), equivalent to He, and no other, is the expected Saviour. (For aujto>v in this sense of excluding others, cf. especially <510116>Colossians 1:16-20.) It may,

however, here not be exclusive, but only intensive he being what he is. The connexion will then be the name Jesus will answer to the fact, for he himself, in his own Person ( <620202>1 John 2:2), by virtue of what he is ( <430224>John 2:24, 25), shall save, etc. Jesus , equivalent to Jeshua (ver. 16, note); he shall save , equivalent to Joshi a. His people . Israel after the flesh (cf. <430111>John 1:11; <420210>Luke 2:10; contrast <430129>John 1:29; 4:42), for whom deliverance from sins must be the first step to restoration to rightful position, and yet the last stage of
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

result from acceptance of Christ. Comparative salvation from sin, due to acceptance of Christ, must precede that restoration which Joseph then desired, and all true Jews still ardently pray for; full salvation from sin will be the final issue of that restoration. From their sins. With a greater salvation, therefore, than that which Manoahs wife was told that her son should begin to accomplish ( <071305>Judges 13:5). Observe that this promise of Christ as Saviour is given to Joseph, who had deeper experience of sin (ver. 20, note), while to Mary, who is marked by promptness of personal devotion, is given the promise of Christ as King ( <420132>Luke 1:32,33). Sate from ( sw>sei ajpo> ) , not merely out of ( ejk , <431227>John 12:27), but from all attacks of sin considered as coming born without (but see <400613>Matthew 6:13, note). Vers. 22, 23. The evidence of prophecy. (Now all this was done .... God with us.) The Revised Version omits the marks of parenthesis. From a comparison of <402656>Matthew 26:56 (and perhaps also <402104>Matthew 21:4), this is not the utterance of the evangelist, but of the previous speaker, yet formulated by the evangelist (cf. Weiss). The thought, that is to say, is still part of the angels encouragement to Joseph; the exact mode of expressing the record of that thought is the evangelists; so also Tatians Diattess. (or perhaps only Ephraems comment upon it; of. Zahn), Quod si dubitas , Isaiam audi. Ver. 22. All this ; tou~to o[lon (not tau~tapa>nta ). The birth of a Saviour, with the means by which it came about, by a virgin, and of the Holy Ghost. Was done ; is come to pass (Revised Version); i.e. in abiding effect ( ge>gonen ). It is considered as having already taken place (cf. the prophetic perfect of the Old Testament). That it might be fulfilled . Gods past utterance is looked at as necessitating a present action. Which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying ; by the Lord through (Revised Version); i.e. the Lord is the Agent ( uJpo> ), the prophet the means or instrument ( dia> ). The Lord ; i.e. Jehovah, not God, because the thought is of covenant promise. Ver. 23. Behold, a virgin ( the virgin , Revised Version) shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son . The difficulty of this quotation from

<230714>

Isaiah 7:14 is .well known.

(1) If the word translated virgin ( almah ) properly means this, and (2) if it be also implied in the promise that the virginity was to be maintained until the birth of the son, then
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

(3) (a) the fulfilment can have been only in the case of our Lord, and (b) the promise was no real sign to Ahaz, and (c) the context of the promise (according to which Rezin and Pekah were to perish in the lads early childhood, vers. 15, 16) has no apparent reference to the promise itself. (4) If, on the other hand, almah means only young woman, the promise might easily be a sign to Ahaz; but, then, how is it that St. Matthew, or rather the angel, apparently lays so much stress on virgin ? The answer is, as it seems, that (1) almah , by derivation, means young woman ( vide Cheyne). but in ordinary usage, virgin. (2) When the promise was uttered by Isaiah, the word suggested virgin, but not (for who would have supposed such a thing?) maintenance of the virginity. (3) The child, thus naturally born, should be called Immanuel, in sign of Gods presence with his people to deliver them from Rezin and Pekah, and, while he was still in childhood, this deliverance should come. The definite article prefixed to virgin ( ha- almah ) either designated a person who was known to the prophet and perhaps also to Ahaz, or, as the article of species (Cheyne), pictured the person more definitely to the mind, though in herself unknown. Thus the promise meant to Ahaz and Isaiah that a woman, at that time a virgin, should bear a son, synchronous with whose childhood should be the Lords deliverance of his people. It is possible that Isaiah further saw in this child the hoped-for Messiah, identifying it with that of <400906>Matthew 9:6, the long time that was yet to intervene being hidden from him. (4) The angel sees a further meaning in the promise than either Ahaz or Isaiah saw, and perceives that, in the providence of God, the words were so chosen as to form a promise of a virgin-birth, the son being of suck origin that, in the

highest sense, he could be truly called Immanuel. It seems not unwise to suppose that God, who designed to send his Son to be the Deliverer of mankind, so ordered the course of the world in his Divine providence that many things should tell of the coming Saviour, so that when he appeared those who had studied Gods revelation should tirol that the scheme of salvation had been one and the same throughout all time. Thus by past events, which had specific meaning in their own time, are
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

found to have further con-rained a prefiguration of greater things in time to come; and to have been promises, ready to receive their highest accomplishmerit as soon as the fitness of time should appear (Dr. Lumby). And they shall call . Men generally, in virtue of his true nature. His name Emmanuel (Revised Version. Immanuel , as <230714>Isaiah 7:14), which being interpreted is, God with us. St. Matthew emphasizes the interpretation in order to, bring out the fact that this Son, now to be born to Joseph, shall not only be Jesus, Saviour, but also God with us; he is the manifestation of God in our midst. The thought is parallel to that of
<430114>

John 1:14.

Vers. 24, 25 . Joseph s threefold obedience taking Mary , not consummating the marriage , naming the child in faith. Ver. 24. Then Joseph being raised ; and Joseph arose (Revised Version); for the stress of the Greek is not on Joseph, but ejgerqei>v . Immediately on arising, Joseph obeyed. From sleep ; from his sleep (Revised Version); i.e. which he was then enjoying. No stress is laid on sleep as such. Did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife. Bidden, in modern English, too much suggests asking; hence the Revised Version commanded ( prose>taxen ). Josephs faith was seen in immediate obedience to commands received. Ver. 25. And knew her not. The tense ( ejgi>nwsken ) brings out the continuance of Josephs obedient self-restraint. He was dwelling in holiness with her (Tatians Diatess.). Till she had brought forth her firstborn Son . Thus the angels promise is so far fulfilled. A son (Revised Version); her firstborn, though found as early as Tatians. Diatess., having been added from <420207>Luke 2:7. Though no great stress can be laid on the word till ( e[wv [ ou+ ], Basil refers to <010807>Genesis 8:7; comp. also Psalm exit. 8), nor even on firstborn, which suggested to a Jew rather consecration ( <420223>Luke 2:23) than the birth of other children (comp. Bishop Lightfoot on Galatians, p.

270, edit. 1890); yet it is a reasonable inference from the passage as a whole that the oujk ejgi>nwsken was not continued after the birth of the Son. Whether, however, other children were born to Mary or not, the true text of this passage gives no hint. And he called his name JESUS (ver. 21, note). Observe that this name had already occurred in Josephs family ( <420329>Luke 3:29). It is, however, now given in sign of Josephs faith in him and his work.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

HOMILETICS.
Vers. 1-17. The introduction.

I. THE TITLE.
1 . It is a book ; but it is not, like other books, the product of human thought. It presents to us a life not like other lives. That life stands alone in its beauty, purity, tenderness, in the glory of its unearthly holiness, in the majesty of its Divine self-sacrifice. It stands alone in its claims; it claims to be the great example, the one pattern life, the Light of the world. It claims to be a revelation of a new life; it offers a gift of power and Divine energy a power which can lift men out of darkness into light, out of worldliness and selfishness into the life of holy love, into the clear light of the presence of God. The conception of that life is unlike any of the ideals of perfection to be found in ancient writers; there was never anything like it before. It has changed our estimate of various moral qualities; it has raised some that the world thought little of to a very high place of dignity; it has depressed others that once stood high in the thoughts of men to their proper level. That life has affected the modes of thought and feeling even of those who will not accept it as a revelation from God. It formed a mighty epoch in the history of thought; men cannot divest themselves of its influence; they cannot think now as they might have thought had that life never been lived on earth. It is impossible for us to put ourselves back into the mental attitude of those who had never heard of that life; it has exercised an influence so widespread, so deep-reaching, over the whole field of thought and feeling. But we can see that that life could never have been conceived by any human genius, least of all at the time when the Gospels were written. Compare it with any efforts of human imagination; there is not one that can even seem to endure the comparison. This history is unique. It has the stamp of genuineness, the ring of truth. Fictitious it cannot be; there never was man that could have invented it. Compare it with other religious writings of antiquity, whether Jewish or Christian; compare it with the apocryphal Gospels, or with the books of the sub-

apostolic Fathers: this book stands absolutely alone; there is no other book like it; the gulf that parts it from all other books is wide, deep, immense. It is the book, the Bible the book that speaks to the heart of man as no other book can, because it is Gods book; it comes from him, and it speaks to the heart which is his handiwork, to the man whom he created in his own image, after his own likeness. It bears in itself the evidence of its Divine origin; we
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

feel , as we read its sacred words, that it has a message for us, that it is Gods voice calling us, telling us all that we need to know of himself, of his will, of his redemption of the human race from sin and death. 2 . The subject of the book. It is the book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the book which tells us of his birth, of his history. It opens with a tab!e of genealogy. He is the Son of David, the Son of Abraham. In him was fulfilled the promise made to Abraham: In thy Seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed. In him was fulfilled .the faithful oath which the Lord had sworn to David: Of the fruit of thy body will I set upon thy throne. The book gives us the history of a Person. Christianity presents to us not simply a code of morals, a system of theology, but a Person. The book describes his character, it relates the circumstances of his life upon earth. It is a history, but it is more than a history. Thy Word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path. It sheds a light upon the way that leadeth to Christ; it shows us where to find him. For this history is not like other histories, merely a record of past facts of more or less interest. It is the revelation of a present Saviour. It has not done its work for us unless it is leading us to Christ himself, to a personal knowledge of the Lord. We may know the Gospel through and through, its language, history, geography, archeology, that knowledge is of deep, absorbing interest; but if we advance no further, we miss the very end for which the Gospel was written. Indeed, it is no Gospel to us, no glad tidings, but only an ancient book, unless by its guidance we find Christ. The deepest biblical scholar, if he fails to find Christ, knows less of the real meaning of the Gospel than the humblest Christian who is living in the faith of the Son of God. It is not the knowledge of the facts of the Lords history, but the living, personal knowledge of himself, that is eternal life. We must learn to abide in him, to live in that fellowship which is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ. Without this spiritual know]edge the Gospel is written in vain for our salvation: The letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life. The mere external knowledge of the Scripture can only increase the condemnation of those who have not sought by prayer and the gracious help of God the Holy Ghost to penetrate its inner meaning. That inner meaning, revealed to our hearts by the Holy Spirit of God, and brought to bear upon our inward and outward lives, giveth life, because it brings us to him who alone is the Life of men. The promise

was that all the nations of the earth should be blessed in the Seed of Abraham; not in his history, not in the record of his life and teaching, but in that holy Seed himself, in his grace, in his abiding presence, in union with him.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

II. THE GENEALOGY.

1 . It begins from Abraham. St. Matthew was writing for the Jews in the first instance. He proves that the Lord Jesus was the Messiah whom the Jews expected, the Son of David, the Son of Abraham. He was descended from the father of the faithful, born in the covenant, himself admitted by the rite of circumcision into the conditions of the ancient covenant. He fulfilled all righteousness, all the requirements of the Law. He lived as a Jew, he preached to the Jews. I am not sent, he said, but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. But even as he said those words he healed the daughter of the Syro-Phoenician woman; it was an earnest of the world- wide range of his redemption. He died, not for that nation only, but that also he should gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad. Therefore through him the blessing of Abraham hath come upon the Gentiles. As St. Paul teaches us in Galatians 3., The Scripture preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed. So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham. There is neither Jew nor Greek; for if we be Christs, then are we Abrahams seed, and heirs according to the promise. Thus the first verse of the First Gospel preaches faith. Christ is the Son of Abraham, who believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness. They which are of faith are the children of Abraham; they share the blessing of Abraham. Christ is theirs, and they are Christs. 2 . The genealogies in Genesis descend from Adam ; this ascends to Christ. God made man in the likeness of God. Adam begat sons in his own likeness, after his image. The sting of the serpent infected the race: Original sin is the fault and corruption of the nature of every man, that naturally is engendered of the offspring of Adam. The Spirit of the Lord indeed strove with man from the beginning; he was not left to die in his sin and misery; the first promise of a Redeemer follows close upon the first sin. God was never without a witness; in Cain and Abel we have the first sight of the field in which the wheat and the tares grow together unto the harvest. But corruption soon spread widely among the descendants of Adam; all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth. As man receded further from the Divine origin of the race, the deeper became the taint of

sin; the traces of the image of God grew ever fainter, the poison of the serpent deadlier and more loathsome. It repented God that he had made man upon earth; the Flood destroyed the ungodly. Then God established his covenant, first with Noah, afterwards with Abraham. The promise became clearer and more definite. The generations had descended from
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

God; now they begin to ascend towards God again, towards the Christ, who is the Son of God, himself God incarnate. Abraham rejoiced to see the day of Christ; he saw it and was glad. Generation after generation looked for the promised Saviour; Simeon was waiting for the consolation of Israel. The Jews inquired of John the Baptist whether he was the Christ that was to come the Christ was to restore all things. In Adam all died, in Christ shall all be made alive; for the last Adam is a quickening Spirit, even the Lord from heaven. He came to restore the almost lost image of God. As we have borne the image of the earthy, we must also bear the image of the heavenly. God hath predestinated his elect to be conformed to the image of his Son. As they draw nearer and nearer to Christ, imitating his blessed example, looking always unto Jesus, they are being renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created them. The generations ascend towards the Christ; so must each Christian strive in his own spiritual life to rise ever nearer to the Lord. 3 . The variations of rank in the genealogy. The generations begin with patriarchs; they rise to kings; they descend again to private men. From Abraham to David the king; from David the king to Joseph the carpenter. Human ancestry, however illustrious, could add nothing to the dignity of the Son of God. But both his blessed mother and Joseph, his father by adoption, were descended from David. Apparently the Lord Jesus was, according to the flesh, the representative of David, the lineal heir to Davids throne. But he lived in obscurity for the first thirty years of his earthly life. He was meek and humble in heart; he prided not himself on earthly rank. Indeed, what was rank to him? The difference between the greatest monarch and the humblest beggar is altogether inappreciable compared with the infinite descent from heaven to earth. When once he had emptied himself of his glory, and taken the form of a servant, it was as nothing that he chose the carpenters shop rather than the royal palace. His earthly ancestors varied in rank. There were kings, there were private men; the reputed father of the Lord, the husband of his mother, was a carpenter. Honours, like wealth, are vanity; the one highest honour, the one loftiest title, is theirs to whom he hath given power to be called the sons of God. 4 . The variations in moral and spiritual character. In the genealogy there are

holy men like Abraham, there are wicked men like Ahaz, Manasseh, Amen. There is a Moabitish woman, pure indeed, and lovely in character, but of heathen blood. Others there are whose lives had been defiled with sin Tamar, Rahab, Bathsheba. The Lord indeed was born by a miraculous conception, without stain of human corruption; but sinners as
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

well as saints are reckoned in his genealogy, lie was made in the likeness of sinful flesh, though he was without sin. His ancestry was not uniformly holy, any more than uniformly royal. The poorest have an interest in him as much as the noblest; the sinful have an interest in him as well as apostles and saints. 5 . The genealogy , like all genealogies , shows the transitoriness of all things human. Abraham begat Isaac, and Isaac begat Jacob, and Jacob begat Judah. Man comes, and man goes; a man is born into the world; man goeth to his long home. Each man represents a long line of ancestors, a line which each generation lengthens, a line stretching back into the remotest past. Most of us know very little of those who have gone before us, not so much as their names. They are gone, and we must follow; we shall soon be but names in the memory of posterity; soon our very names will be forgotten. But God hath said, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. He is not the God of the dead, but of the living. Then the dead of ages past are living still; we speak of them as the dead, but they live unto God. Their number is incalculable; the world of the dead is infinitely more numerous than the world of the living. But they are all known, every one of them, to the all-seeing God. We shall soon be gathered to that countless multitude. It matters little now to them what their rank, their wealth, was in life. The patriarch, the king, the carpenter, are distinguished now only by their faith, their holiness. Many that once were last are first now, and the last are first. So will it be with us who are living now. Lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven; Seek first the kingdom of God. 6 . The genealogy shows the true manhood of Christ. According to the flesh he is descended, like ourselves, from a long line of human ancestors. His birth was miraculous; but on his mothers side he came out of Judah, Judah from Abraham, Abraham from Adam. He represents human nature; he is bone of our bone, and flesh of our flesh; he was made in all things like unto us, yet without sin. 7 . The genealogy shows his Divine birth ; for Jacob begat Joseph, the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ. He was born of Mary; he was not the Son of Joseph; he had no earthly father. Joseph was the husband of Mary, but not the father of Jesus; he was born of her. The first mention of his

birth points at once to other than a human origin. He who is the Son of Abraham is also the Son of God.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

8 . The numbers. The three fourteens are probably intended to assist the memory, but they may possibly contain a mystical meaning. Seven is the signature of perfection; two, of human witness; three, of God. The history which we are approaching is the history of One who, though he appeared in the form of man, was in truth God. It is related by human witnesses; it is perfect, sufficient for all our needs. These are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his Name. The book which we are opening is the book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the book which relates the redeeming work of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me. Reverence, awe, and adoring love are the tempers of mind meet for such a study. LESSONS . 1 . Search the Scriptures; they testify of Christ, and Christ is our Life. 2 . Receive the word as the word of God; it has a message for you. 3 . Believe in him; do his will. The study of the Scriptures must not end in knowledge; it must lead to faith and to obedience; it must lead to Christ. 4 . Life is short; eternity is long. Set your affections on things above. Vers. 18-25. The birth of Jesus Christ.

I. THE DISTRESS OF MARY.

1 . She was betrothed to Joseph. They had loved one another with a pure and holy love; now they were betrothed. The tie of betrothal was in the eyes of the Jews as sacred as that of marriage. The bridegroom had not yet taken home his bride; she was still in her parents house. They were looking forward to the coming nuptials. It was the time upon which, years afterwards, men look back

with such tender recollections the time when young love was budding in all its freshness and purity; the time gilded by so many bright hopes of happiness to come; a time especially blessed when both are living in the faith and love of God, and are looking forward to live together in that holy estate of matrimony, which represents the mystical union that is betwixt Christ and the Church. 2 . She was found with child. Every rose has its thorns; that bright, happy time is often, in ordinary experience, clouded with difficulties and anxieties.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

Never was there a greater trial for a betrothed pair than this which befell Joseph and Mary. They loved one another, we may be sure, deeply, sincerely. Now there was a barrier between them; it seemed an impassable hairier. Mary knew the secret: did she tell her betrothed? It may be that she thought it too sacred, too awful; she could not tell even Joseph. She had received the angels message in implicit faith. Behold the handmaid of the Lord, she had said; be it unto me according to thy word. Perhaps she kept the secret in her heart; it was a strange mixture of awful joy and very bitter anguish. Those who are nearest to the Lord are often called to drink of his cup and to be baptized with his baptism. It was so now with the blessed virgin. She was to have that highest grace for which Jewish matrons longed so earnestly she was to be the mother of the Christ; but she had to undergo a trial most acutely painful, a shame most terrible to a pure maiden soul. She seemed unworthy of the love of him who loved her best, whom she loved with the deep affection of a tender virgin-heart. She bore it in patience, though her heart was breaking; it was the agony which she had anticipated when she yielded herself in faith to the holy will of God. Perhaps she bore it in silence; the mystery was too deep, too awful for words. Perhaps (for we cannot tell)she whispered it to Joseph. But it was too strange, too incredible. He loved her and he trusted her; there is no real love without mutual confidence. But there is a limit to the trustfulness of the most loving heart. And this story seemed altogether impossible. Joseph could not believe it. His suspicions were natural, excusable; but how cruelly they must have wounded the tender heart of Mary! 3 . It was of the Holy Ghost. The evangelist relates in few and simple words the greatest fact in the worlds history; the miracle of miracles, in tile train of which lesser miracles must of necessity follow. The Incarnation is a truth above words, above the reach of human thought; it calls upon us, not for rhetorical description, but fur adoration and thanksgiving. The Spirit of God had moved [brooded] upon the face of the waters in the day when God created the heaven and the earth. And now in the beginning of the new creation the Holy Ghost had come upon the blessed virgin, the power of the Highest had overshadowed her. She was highly favoured indeed, blessed above all other women, chosen to be the mother of the Lord. Very pure and holy she must have been; it may well be, the holiest of women, as she was the most highly favoured. But she was a creature,

born in sin like ourselves, needing, like ourselves, to be cleansed by the atoning blood of her own Divine Son. And now the unique grace and dignity vouchsafed unto her brought with it a season of heart-rending anguish.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

II. JOSEPH.
1 . He was a just man. He too was sorely tried. He had tenderly loved his bctrothed; he loved her still. He was in a position of the greatest perplexity. Mary was conscious of her own innocence; the angel had announced to her the cause of her immaculate conception. Joseph had, at the most, only her word to trust in; appearances were against her; her statement, if she told him all, required a very high degree of unquestioning, trustful faith. But he was a just man; he would not do her wrong. He could not wholly believe; perhaps he did not wholly disbelieve. We may be sure chat he was distracted with anxiety. He was a just man; he wished to do what was right; but he was in a great difficulty; it caused him long and anxious thought. 2 . His intention. He intended to adopt a middle course; he would not expose his betrothed; he loved her still. His justice was not the strict, stern justice which considers only the letter of the Law; it was tempered with the gentler feelings, mercy and compassion. He could not bring one whom he had loved so dearly into the danger of shame and death. But under circumstances so suspicious he could not consummate the marriage. He was minded to put her away privily.

III. THE DIVINE INTERVENTION.

1 . The solution of Joseph s doubts. He thought on these things. We may be sure that he prayed. It was misery to him to mistrust his betrothed; it was misery to be doubtful about the right path to be pursued in a case of such momentous importance to them both. A holy man like Joseph, who prayed always, would pray most earnestly, most importunately under circumstances so distressing. At last the answer came. God will not leave his servants in perplexity; he will clear up their doubts; he will teach them what they ought to do. But trust in God does not remove the duty of thoughtfulness. We must think, as Joseph thought, seriously and prayerfully, when difficult questions present themselves. If we do this, God will not suffer us to be led astray; he will guide us aright. 2 . The angel. The word means messenger. The blessed angels are Gods

messengers; they are sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation. They help us now, for they encamp round about those who fear the Lord. They bring Gods messages of love to us now, as they did then to Joseph; they guide us now, as they then guided him. The angel appeared
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

to him in a dream; so they often whisper now the intimations of Gods holy will in the hour of quiet, in the silence of the night. 3 . The message. It calmed the fears of Joseph, it removed his doubts, it enabled him to rejoice once more in the love of his betrothed. There was nothing to separate her from him. tie was to take her; her words, if she had told him, strange and mysterious as they were, were strictly true; that which was conceived in her was of the Holy Ghost. She should bring forth a Son, a Son who should be the Saviour of the world, not Josephs son, but entrusted for a time to Josephs care. Mary was to be the mother of the Lord, the highest honour surely ever vouchsafed to child of Adam; Joseph was to have the great joy of watching over his infancy and youth. Surely no charge so high and holy had ever been entrusted even to the blessed angels. It was Gods answer to prayer, the prayer of a righteous man which availeth much with God. His anxiety was over new; his doubts were dispelled; his path was clear. He was a righteous man; he had thought and he had prayed. God will answer us, he will guide us in our perplexities, and show us the path of duty, if, like Joseph, we try to live a holy life, if we think seriously, if we pray earnestly.

IV. THE PROPHECY.

1 . It must be fulfilled. For it was spoken of the Lord. Holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. Isaiah is often called the evangelical prophet; in his prophecy we have the foreshadowing of the gospel, the good tidings of salvation; his very name points to the Saviour; it is Jesus with the elements reversed, it means the salvation of Jehovah. The prophecy was given through him; but he was not the author of it, it came from God. God had spoken it, and he would make it good. He had announced his will long ago, and at length the time was come. Now all this is come to pass, the angel said (for these words are part of the message), that it might be fulfilled. All this had come to pass that human nature might be cleansed by its union with the Divine nature in the Person of Christ. That great result was the end contemplated by the prophecy; to fulfil the prophecy, and to save the souls of men, was the same thing, It was an end worthy of a Divine intervention, worthy of an angel-messenger. All this, the

annunciation, the miraculous conception, all this is come to pass that his gracious purpose, announced so long ago, might now be fulfilled. 2 . The substance of the prophecy. The Hebrew words mean literally, The virgin is with child, and beareth a Son. The prophet is speaking of one
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

virgin, one illustrious and unique, as Chrysostom says. The terms of the prophecy can be satisfied only by a miraculous conception, a supernatural birth. It is the sign which the Lord himself shall give the sign of the Messiah, the sign of deliverance from sin and death. That marvellous birth, foretold so solemnly, in such strange, startling language, was to be the beginning of the kingdom of heaven, the kingdom of God upon earth. For the virgin-born is the King, the King who must reign till all his enemies are put under his feet. And he is God with us Immanuel. He has taken upon him the form of a servant; he is made in the likeness of men. He was from all eternity in the form of God, living in that glory which he had with the Father before the world was. Now he is Immanuel, God with us, the Word incarnate. The Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us. He has taken upon him our human nature, that by the mysterious union of the human and Divine in the one Person of Christ our human nature might be cleansed from the dark stain of sin, and be created anew after the image of God. God is with us with us to redeem, to cleanse, to regenerate, to sanctify. He abideth in us if we are truly his, he in us and we in him. He is with us always even to the end of the world, ready to hear our prayer, ready to help us, ready to save us even to the uttermost; for through the wondrous miracle of the Incarnation he is ours and we are his, if we abide in his love.

V. THE HOLY NAME.

1 . Joseph s obedience. All his doubts were dispelled, his anguish was gone, he was filled with a strange and awful joy. His betrothed was to be the mother of the Messiah. He was to care for her now, to watch over the infancy of the holy Child. He took unto him his wife; he respected her spotless purity; he lived with her in reverential awe. At last the promised Child was born. Joseph looked upon the heavenly face of the blessed Babe. There is something very sweet in the calm face of an innocent infant. What a depth of celestial beauty must there have been in the smile of the infant Jesus! what a treasure of unspeakable joy must that holy Babe have been to Mary and Joseph! He called his name Jesus, in obedience to the angels bidding. 2 . Many had borne that name already. It is the Greek form of the common

Hebrew name Joshua. The first Joshua of whom we read was called originally Oshea or Hoshea; this name, which was also the name of the last King of Israel and of the first in order of the minor prophets, means salvation. Moses added to it the sacred name, and called the son of Nun
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

Jehoshua or Joshua, the salvation of Jehovah He fulfilled the prophecy contained in his name. He was steadfast in unswerving allegiance to Jehovah: As for me and my house, he said, we will serve the Lord. He was the Lords instrument in saving the people of Israel out of the hands of their enemies. He led them through the river Jordan, he fought their battles for them, he gave them rest in the promised land. In all this he was an eminent type of our Lord, who is the Captain of our salvation, who fought out the fearful conflict for us against the deadly enemy, who leads his people through the river of death into the everlasting rest. The name of their great leader naturally became common among the Jews; it appears again and again under its various forms, Oshea, Hoshea, Jehoshua, Joshua, Joshua, Jesus. 3 . But only the Son of God fulfilled its blessed meaning. He was indeed the Salvation of Jehovah; he was Jehovah, God the Son, come in his infinite tenderness, in his Divine compassion, to save his people. He shall save his people from their sins, the angel said. This was the meaning, the translation of the name. He himself shall save his people, the Greek word means himself by his own power. The first Joshua saved the Israelites by the help of God; the second Joshua is himself God, therefore he himself is able to save even to the uttermost all who come unto God by him. He shall save his people. He came to redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works. He has a people, his own people, for he is a King, and his people are a kingdom of priests, a holy nation. They belong to him; they are his, bought with a price; they are not their own. All Christians are his by solemn dedication to his service in holy baptism; but in the deepest sense they only are his people in whom the promise is fulfilled, whom he is saving from their sins. Alas! there are some of whom it is written, Call his name Lo-ammi: for ye are not my people, and I will not be your God ( <280109>Hosea 1:9). 4 . His salvation is present. He saves his people from their sins; not only from the punishment of sin, but from the sin itself. His precious blood, once shed upon the cross, cleanses all who believe in him from the defilement of sin. His gracious presence, abiding in the heart through the indwelling of his Spirit, saves his people from the dominion of sin. The sting of death is sin; but God giveth us

the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ. This is the plain teaching of Holy Scripture; then if we are his, sin must be losing its power over us, for his blood is cleansing from all sin those who walk in the light of his presence, and he is saving them from the power of sin. We must try to realize in our own experience this victory
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

over sin. Most people seem to be content with a life that falls very short of anything that can be called victory. But this is what God promises to give us; the Lord Jesus came to save his people from their sins; the purpose of his coming is not fulfilled in us unless we are saved from them. And he will save us, himself will save us, if we trust his word and come to him in faith. 5 . And it is future , it is everlasting. Joshua led the children of Israel into Canaan; Jesus leads his people into heaven. He is preparing a place for us there, and is preparing us for it. Without holiness no man shall see the Lord; but he of God is made unto us Sanctification. He makes his people holy by the gift of his Spirit. He takes away the sting of death, which is sin, and changes death into sleep. Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord, for if they die in him, in spiritual union with him, he is their Jesus, their Saviour; the blessed meaning of the holy Name is realized in their experience, and refreshes their soul in death with its heavenly music. LESSONS . 1 . Gods holiest saints are often very sorely tried. Be patient; trust always. 2 . God heareth prayer; he will bring the afflictions of his people to a happy issue. 3 . The holy Name is exceeding precious and sacred; pronounce it with reverence; treasure it in your heart; do all things in the name of the Lord Jesus. 4 . He shall save his people from their sins: is he saving you from yours?

HOMILIES BY W.F. ADENEY

Ver. 1. Genealogical lessons. We are tempted to pass by the string of names with which the New Testament

opens, as though it had no moral significance, as though it were only a relic of Jewish domestic annals. But even the genealogies in Genesis are eloquent in lessons on human life its brevity, its changes, its succession, its unity in the midst of diversity; and the genealogy of our Lord has its own peculiar importance, reminding us of many facts.

I. CHRIST IS TRULY HUMAN. It will be a great mistake if we so conceive of

his Divinity as in any way to diminish our idea of his humanity.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

He was as true a man as if he had not been more than a man. The Divinity in him overflows the humanity, fills it and surrounds it, but does not destroy it. Christ is not a demi-god half-way between man and God. Perfectly one with his Father on the Divine side of his nature, he is equally one with us on the human.

II. CHRIST HAS CLOSE RELATIONSHIP WITH OTHER MEN. He does not
descend out of the sky like an angel, or suddenly appear at our tent-door as the three men appeared to Abraham ( <011802>Genesis 18:2). He comes in the line of a known household, and takes his place in the family tree. This family tree suggests kinship. A family is more than a collection of men, women, and children, more or less closely associated together like the grains of sand on the seashore. There is blood-relationship in it The solidarity of the human race makes one man to be the brother of all men. But the family relationship is even closer. Our Lord extends his own closest kinship to all who do the will of God ( <401250>Matthew 12:50).

III. THE PAST LEADS UP TO CHRIST. He has his roots in the ages. Those
dim, sorrowful years did not come and go in vain. They were all laying the foundation on which, in the fulness of time, God would build his glorious temple. Yet the men whose names are immortalized in this list knew not of their high destiny. We live for a future that is beyond our vision.

IV. CHRIST IS NOT ACCOUNTED FOR BY HIS ANCESTRY. Some people

are proud of a noble pedigree. Yet it is possible to be the worthless scion of a glorious house, for families often degenerate. On the other hand, many of the best men have emerged out of obscurity. We may believe in blood to a certain extent, but heredity will not explain the most striking phenomena of human life. Most assuredly it will not explain the marvellous nature and character of Christ. Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? ( <181404>Job 14:4). Christ is not the product of such lives as those of his ancestors here given. His unique glory is not of this world, as a comparison of his life with his genealogy should show us.

V. CHRIST SUMS UP THE GLORIES OF THE PAST. All that is great and
good in his ancestors is contained in Christ and surpassed by him. 1 . The Jewish faith. Christs pedigree goes back to Abraham, the friend of God; and in Christ Abrahams faith and piety are perfected, and the promises to Abraham are fulfilled.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

2 . The Jewish throne. Christ is Davids heir. He inherits Davids kingship anti he exceeds it, realizing in fact what David imperfectly foreshadowed in type. W. F.A. Ver. 21. The name Jesus. Jesus was the personal name of our Lord, the Greek equivalent of the old Jewish name Joshua, and not unknown in Hebrew families. Therefore to his contemporaries it would not have the unique associations that it has for us. It would be merely the designation of an individual. But everything that Christ touches is elevated to a new value by his contact with it. Now that he has been named Jesus, that name is to us precious as ointment poured forth.

I. THE MAIN MISSION OF CHRIST IS TO SAVE. His work may be regarded

in many lights, fie is the great Teacher. His kingly throne is set up, and he has come to rule over us. In daily life he is the Friend that sticketh closer than a brother. But before all he is the Saviour. This comes first, as the personal name Jesus comes before the official title Christ. It is of his very nature to save. He cannot teach or rule or cheer us effectually until he has saved us. Now, this is the unique glory of Christ. Nature destroys the weak and cherishes the strong. Christ has pity on failure; he comes to rescue from ruin. Wherever there is distress or danger there he finds his peculiar sphere of activity.

II. THE GREAT EVIL FROM WHICH CHRIST SAVES IS SIN. Other evils
are also removed. But they are of but a secondary character, and are not worthy to be named in comparison with this dark and direful curse of mankind. When once sin is mastered and cast out, it will be an easy work to expel the secondary troubles of life. For the most part they are the consequences of this monstrous evil, and will depart with it. At all events, we shall be stronger to bear those that remain when the heart-paralysis of moral evil is cured. The last thing that many people want from Christ is to be saved from their sin. They would be glad to be delivered from its pains and penalties, but the thing itself they love and have no

wish to abandon. For them there is no salvation. Christ aims at the sin first of all. He treats it as mans deadly foe. For those who feel its weight, here is the very essence of the gospel What we cannot do for ourselves by resolution and effort he can do for us, if we will open our hearts and let him in. Take this
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

literally. He can save us from our own sins our defects of character, evil habits, bad temper, vices.

III. THIS SALVATION IS FOR CHRISTS PEOPLE. Here is a limitation. It

must not be forgotten that the Gospel of St. Matthew was written for Jews. Christs first mission was to save the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Yet no one who reads the New Testament throughout can doubt that the limitation is not final. The Jew was only to have the first offer of salvation. He was to be invited in to the feast that he might afterwards go out and introduce others. Now the message is that Christ is able to save to the uttermost them that draw near unto God through him ( <580725>Hebrews 7:25). Yet the specification of his people has still an important meaning. Christ is not only the Saviour at the entrance of the Christian life, but throughout its course. The people of God are not perfect; daily they commit new sins, and Christ is their daily Saviour. Not only at the moment of regeneration, but through the long and often sadly stained Christian life, we need Christ to save from sins that still beset us. W.F.A. Ver. 23. Immanuel. There is some obscurity as to the primary intention of these words as they appear in the narrative of Isaiah ( <230714>Isaiah 7:14); but the fitness of their application to Christ, now that he has come to fill in their meaning, makes the first use of them of small moment to us. For us they are a description of the birth and nature of our Lord.

I. THE VIRGIN-BIRTH. We may be sure that it was not in order to throw any
discredit on the sanctity of marriage that God so ordered it that his Son should be born from a virgin, The New Testament honours marriage as truly as the Old Testament; and St. Paul, who is sometimes regarded as unfriendly to it, describes

it as like the union of Christ with his Church. What, then, is the significance of the virgin-birth? 1 . A mystery. It is right and reasonable that he who comes from the bosom of the Father should enter this world under circumstances that we cannot understand. Nevertheless, we may see to some extent what this means. 2 . A miracle. Men of science have pointed out that this miracle is not so difficult to believe in as many others, because parthenogenesis is known in nature, though it is not found among men. Here, then, is something beyond
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

the range of what happens in human experience, yet according to the known working of God in other spheres. 3 . A holy birth. This is not the case because virginity is in any way more holy than marriage. Nevertheless, it has occurred to many that possibly the transmission of seeds of evil may have been avoided by this miracle. At all events, we know the fact that Christ was perfectly pure and stainless from his birth.

II. THE DIVINE NATURE. The human name of our Lord is Jesus a name
that describes his work on earth. His prophetic name is Immanuel, one that reveals the deeper mystery of his mission. 1 . The fact. In Jesus Christ we see the union of God and man. God is no longer a distant Being seated on his throne above the heavens. He has descended to this earth. It is difficult to think of God as the Infinite One who inhabits eternity; the very idea is so vast that it seems to melt away into vagueness. It is intangible; we cannot lay hold of it. But Christ we can see and understand. In Christ God looks at us with human eyes, speaks to us in an earthly tongue, touches us with a brothers hand. That this is so we can believe, not because we are informed of the doctrine of the Incarnation on authority, but just because, when we come to know Christ for ourselves, we can see God in him. 2. The grace. This great truth lies at the foundation of the gospel. All Christianity is built on the Incarnation. Although men may deliver one another from minor ills, only God can save from sin. Therefore, if Jesus is a Saviour in the deepest sense of the word, he must be God as well as man. But this is only one side of the subject, tie must be also God with us as the Fathers represented it, the hand of God outstretched. He saves us by bringing God into us. W.F.A.

HOMILIES BY P.C. BARKER

Ver. 19.

Suggestions of just ways of covering sin. The contents of this verse and the following are, so far as they go, corroborating evidence of the supernatural origin and superhuman incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. For if these things be not the truth respecting him, then will these verses also have to rank among the supposed cunningly devised fables; whereas in very truth their aspect is of
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

the most opposite character. The aspect of these verses and their connection are strikingly of the real and the matter-of-fact. They present themselves and they speak so naturally. In those days of the Churchs history which saw casuistry at its most flourishing, it may easily be imagined that the point would have been considered a most legitimately profitable one for argument, whether Joseph were more entitled or less entitled to the epithet of a just man, in that he had it in his mind to put away privily his espoused wife rather than at once make a public example of what would too probably soon become a public scandal. And again, whether his intention to do this privily savoured most of regard for public advantage, or of self regard, or of regard for the supposed erring woman. From our point of view, any approach to the casuistical may be safely dispensed with. But in place thereof, we may fitly make this verse the occasion for inquiring what are some of the determining or guiding considerations which may be held to justify the disposition to shield human fault, sin, fall, rather than to expose it. We are on the safe side

I. WHEN WE SEEK TO SHIELD A PERSON, THE SINNER, FROM PUBLIC

EXPOSURE RATHER THAN SAY A WORD, EITHER TO HIMSELF OR TO THE PUBLIC, IN THE NATURE OF EXTENUATING THE SIN.

II. WHEN WE SEEK TO SHIELD ANOTHER RATHER THAN ONES SELF. III. WHEN WE SEEK TO SHIELD THE PERSON WHO, EITHER BY
NATURE OR BY INDIVIDUAL TEMPERAMENT, WOULD TAKE DISPROPORTIONATE SUFFERING; as, e.g. : 1 . A woman, in anything that especially concerns the nature of woman. 2 . Or any one whose known sensitiveness would render him liable to abnormal suffering.

IV. WHEN WE SEEK TO SHIELD FROM EXPOSURE CERTAIN KINDS

OF SIN, VIZ. THOSE WHICH UNIVERSAL OBSERVATION TELLS US DO IN THE VERY ANNOUNCEMENT OF THEM SERVE TO EXCITE

UNHEALTHY INTEREST, PRURIENT CURIOSITY. In not a few cases, notoriety undoubtedly attracts instead of deterring. It attracts also not in mere morbid and exceptional cases, but in virtue of a fascination not indeed otherwise explainable, but very easily explained when some of the radical vice of human nature is confessed. In the present
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

instance, it is to be understood by the reverent reader of the history that Joseph, as a just man, felt he had no choice but (1) to put away the woman who seemed to have erred; (2) to put her away privily, in order to avoid both public scandal as far as possible and unadvisable aggravation of her and his own feelings. The justifiableness of qualifications of this kind is amply illustrated by the conduct of Christ himself, alike in the instance of the woman taken in adultery, and in that of Mary Magdalene. B. Ver. 21. The Name which is above every name. In introduction dwell briefly on the thought of the Divine care, shown, first , in foreguarding Israel and, so to say, the world so early from mistake as to the character of their coming Saviour, Hope, King; and, secondly , in guiding Israel from the very first to understand that whatever breadth, height, scope, might belong to the salvation of the Saviour who was to be, it could in the first instance only be attained through men becoming extricated from sin. The keynote of the mission and of the very character of the Christ was ordained to be sounded in his Name. It is sounded in this name Jesus. It was announced before his appearance. It was wonderfully illustrated during some years preceding his disappearance from earth. And from that to this, the most significant of the worlds history has been a constantly accumulating testimony to the truthfulness of the Name. Notice now this Name under the following simple aspects.

I. FOR THE LARGE PROFESSION THAT LIES IN IT IN CHALLENGING

THE TEST OF WHAT IT WOULD PRACTICALLY DO. The Name challenges universal observation, but also universal judgment. And the facilities for exercising and pronouncing that judgment are great. They are ready to hand. The Name says that he who owns it wills to be judged by what he shall do.

II. FOR THE LARGE PROFESSION THAT LIES IN IT IN RESPECT OF

THE UNLIMITED ANNOUNCEMENT OF THE SAVING. The saving in question, whatever it be, does not save itself by any qualification of the direction , the extent , the length of time , in which its efficacy should be found good. Thou shalt call his Name Jesus. Although it is added, for he shall save his people from their sins , we know that statement to be as broad, comprehensive, unlimited as the Name itself Savior.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

III. FOR THE LARGE PROFESSION THAT LIES IN IT OF

UNSELFISHNESS. To save is to do something for others, at all events, as the word applies here. And to spend and be spent thus, unasking anything for self, is the essence of unselfishness.

IV. FOR THE NOVELTY AND UNIQUENESS OF IT, THE ABOVE THREE
THINGS BEING GRANTED. Nothing had approached it before in the worlds whole history.

V. FOR THE CONSISTENT, UNDEVIATING, AND UNCEASING

ILLUSTRATION GIVEN TO IT BY THE WHOLE EARTHLY LIFE OF CHRIST. All of it spoke the Saviour, and not least so certainly when it spoke the destroyer of destruction, the forerunning of the destruction of the destroyer.

VI. FOR THE YET MORE WONDERFUL ILLUSTRATION GIVEN TO IT

IN THE LONG, THE CALM, THE STILL-LASTING, THE EVERLASTING LEGACY OF THAT LIFE. That legacy is ever speaking: 1 . Pre-eminently the Saviour, as compared with everything else either great or good. such as the Teacher , or the Example. 2 . The Saviour, as distinguished from one who does, yet does but little. 3 . The Saviour, as one all of whose workings are those of light, of advance, and of enduring good. B. Ver. 23. The Name, the burden of prophecy. Introduction. Though in the order of the historic narrative this name of prophecy, Immanuel, comes second on this page, yet had it already found its place on the page of ages ago. It is the Name by which the prophet had long ago declared forcibly the dignity of the Christ the real Being, the Christ. Whereas the other

Name of our vers. 21, 24: was that given now in the fulness of time, which dared boldly to challenge the proof in the immediate future of both itself and of the other predicted Name their main truth, their minute accuracy. The reminiscence of prophecy, and the quotation of prophetic language now before us, are the appropriate, the natural sequel of the historic announcement of the
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

incarnation and superhuman origin of Christ; and they are the appropriate anticipation of the illustrious career of the Saviour-Christ. Notice

I. THE CONNECTION PRECLUDES THE EXPLANATION OF A MERE

METAPHORIC OR A MERE SPIRITUAL MEANING AS THAT WHICH SHOULD JUSTLY ATTACH TO THIS DESCRIPTION OF CHRIST. The Name is given clearly in closest connection with the statement that one who was still a virgin should conceive and bring forth a son. Truly enough, there are a hundred things in which God shall be said to be with man. But it is no one of those hundred ways now. It is one that takes precedence of them all.

II. THAT THE FACT ONCE GRANTED OF THE MIRACULOUS

CONCEPTION OF CHRIST OFFERS FOR OUR THOUGHT THE DEEP NECESSITY OF SUCH KIND OF UNION, SUCH REALITY OF UNION OF GOD WITH MAN FOR THE ACCOMPLISHMENT OF THE REDEMPTION OF MAN. There must be a certain kind of presence of God with man. The nature of that presence is all-important. All that is most distinctive in what we may call the revelation and the genius of the New Testament really hinges hereupon. Though probably all figures ought to be ruled incompetent to this great, this astounding fact , yet perhaps we shall not stray if we put it thus that the Incarnation was a literal and a veritable graft of the Divine upon the human nature. Its object was at least twofold. 1 . To bring a literal Presence into this world, and partly of this world, which otherwise would certainly in no course of things be here; One which should be a certain incomparable Sight , a certain incomparable Sound, a certain paramount Example among men. From that Presence would come, and come in streams, forces of new impression, of light, of conviction, of surprise, otherwise unattainable; no comet of heavenly bodies in the sky a millionth part so fruitful of impression and so intrinsically attracting, as this unsurpassed comet of real Divine nature within earths humble range. 2 . To bring that Presence into this world to execute one supreme, incomparable task. The motto, nay, the very key-note of the new song of this whole world is

heard in the word atonement. And though this be not the place to go beyond the statement of the fact, that fact is that God with man alone found the proper Man (Luthers hymn) able, willing, to meet the crisis, to suffer the suffering, to master the problem, and to atone. B.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

HOMILIES BY MARCUS DODS

Vers. 1 -17. Genealogy of our Lord. Homiletical uses

I. Matthews purpose is to show that Jesus, after the flesh, was THE HEIR OF
DAVID AND OF ABRAHAM, the true Inheritor of the promises and of the liabilities of Israel. At his birth instructed Israelites might exclaim, Unto us a Son is born! one who entered into a family of broken fortune, but was able to redeem its fortunes; who came not to build up a competence for himself, but to accept the obligations of the family, and work out for it a full emancipation. It was also requisite that Jesus should be recognized as the Heir of David, as the promised ideal King of Israel

II. THE THREE TIMES FOURTEEN GENERATIONS, though artificial, did

yet appeal to the Jewish mind as a symbol of the fulness of times. Of signs that the time was ripe for the birth of Christ there was no lack. The world had done as much as it was ever likely to do without the new influences Christ brought into it. No government had ever more at command for the regeneration of the world than Rome had. It enlightened policy, bold statesmanship, extensive dominion, could have abolished the worlds woes, no more was required than Rome had given to the world. In Greece, culture had done its best; in the further East, Buddha, Confucius, Zoroaster, had done all that human wisdom and purity could do to regulate the life and elevate the thoughts of men. The Jewish Law, Mosaism in all its departments, was also played out. It had yielded the utmost of benefit, and was now running to seed. A general feeling was stealing through many lands that the world needed help from above. Note, too, the preparation for the gospel in the spread of the Jews throughout the commercial world, the general prevalence of the Greek language, and the facility for intercourse afforded by the Roman government.

III. THE REASON OF THE LONG DELAY. At first sight one might suppose
many good ends would have been served by Christs appearing much earlier in the worlds history. What prevented Christ from coming two thousand years before he did, and giving the world the advantage of two thousand years more enjoyment of the best form of religion? Had Christ come as soon as the promise was given, the world would have been
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

found unprepared for the gift, and unable to give it even that moderate welcome it afterwards found. The Law must first do its work, deepening the sense of duty, stirring conscience to an almost morbid activity, revealing the holiness of God, and showing men their lostness. The great gift of the Holy Spirit, the promise by preeminence, would not have been welcomed. God had to educate the world, as parents educate children, by alluring them onwards and by inconsiderable gifts teaching them gradually to long for the highest. He taught them to think of, to know, and to trust him by giving them what suited their condition and tastes; and so they learned by degrees to prize what he most highly esteemed inward, spiritual prosperity.

IV. In our Lords genealogy there is THE ORDINARY PROPORTION OF

GOOD AND BAD PARENTAGE. Individuals are mentioned who would do no honour to any pedigree. The pride of birth which many of us feel would be abated were the whole ancestry from which we are sprung set down with biographies attached. We have only to go back far enough to find stain. Worse still, who can say what his own children shall be, and to what extent their disgrace is due to their inherited tendencies? Our Lord did not shun the contamination to which he was necessarily exposed by his true entrance into the human family. APPLICATION . 1 . Grace not hereditary. Fuller says, Lord, I find the genealogy of my Saviour strangely chequered with four remarkable changes in four immediate generations. (1) Roboam begat Abia: that is, a bad father begat a bad son. (2) Abia begat Asa: that is, a bad father a good son. (3) Ass begat Josaphat: that is, a good father a bad son. (4) Josaphat begat Joram: that is, a good father a good son. I see, Lord, from hence that my fathers piety cannot be entailed: that is bad news for me. But I see also that actual impiety is not always hereditary: that is good news for my son.

2 . Relationship to Christ. The honour of being connected with Christ after the flesh. Yet even after he was born and seen among men this honour was not felt as we might expect; and at all events no special saving influence was exerted on the individuals composing his line of descent. Closer than
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

every earthly tie is the spiritual relationship he announces in <401250>Matthew 12:50. D. Vers. 18 -25. Nativity of our Lord.

I. SUPERNATURAL ORIGIN OF THE HUMAN NATURE OF OUR LORD.

He who came to be a new Head and Source of life to humanity could scarcely be the product of the old stock. All other men have sprung from Adam; all that has appeared in humanity is the evolution of what was in the first man. No new blood has been infused into the race. But in Christ a new beginning is made. As a matter of fact, he has never been accounted for by natural causes. His distinctive character among men requires an unusual, exceptional origin. If by close historical scrutiny or critical questioning we fail to resolve the miraculous character of Jesus the ultimate fact of Christianity into the common, known elements of our human nature; if the laws of heredity prove insufficient to .explain his generation; then the further question will at once arise whether there may not be other than natural elements present in human history which come to their perfect flower in Jesus of Nazareth? whether we may not find in the laws and forces of a supernatural evolution the sufficient explanation of his miraculous Person? Expand by showing how neither Hebrew nor Gentile influences account for Jesus, and by showing the originality of the character and plan of Jesus, his sinlessness, his authority, his self-assertion.

II. THE TRUE HUMANITY OF JESUS. The Son of God did not come and
assume for a year or two the appearance of a man in his prime. He was born a human Child, as truly human as any of us, with all human appetites, necessary emotions, and liabilities. Human birth ushers human beings into an existence out of which they cannot retire. So it was with our Lord. He lived under the limitations and restrictions which necessarily attend human nature. His was a real humanity. He that sanctifieth and they that are sanctified are all of one. We think of him as for the most part a spectator marking the conduct of others and caring for them, but having no righteousness of his own to maintain and

continue. We are very conscious of the difficulties of the sanctified, but are apt to forget that he who sanctifies had the same temptations and the same difficulties. He as well as they had to watch and pray, to cry for aid and for relief, to put from him the views of the world which tempted him to abandon his high purpose. Miraculous birth is not necessarily an incarnation of God. But no miraculous birth recorded in the Bible was produced similarly to this. And
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

the preparation thus made for the Incarnation is obvious. The mode of the Incarnation, as well as much else regarding it, is obscure; but it rosy be right to point here to one or two of its chief lessons or results. 1 . Jesus is a Divine Person. That self which has ever been the same in all its acts is Divine. He may act now through his human nature eating, sleeping, dying or he may act through his Divine nature; but he who does so is not a man, but God the Son. What we find in Christ is God furnishing himself with a human body, mind, and soul, through and in which he as truly lives and works as through and in his Divine nature. Being the same Person after his incarnation as before, he took our nature that he might taste death for every man; that he might, that is, he who was already existing before he became Man. His Divine nature could not die, but he means to taste death, and therefore takes a nature which can suffer death. In that death on the cross no person died but the Son of God. 2 . Another lesson of the Incarnation, if not of the Nativity, is too important to overlook. If we would learn how to benefit our fellow-men, we must study our Lords method. Looking upon us who were infinitely beneath him, and desiring to bring us up more nearly to his level, he saw that the way to do so was to become one of us; to come among us and share with us in all but sin. There is probably more in this example than we are always willing to admit. We speak of raising the masses. One would take Christs way of doing so who should himself become a sharer in their condition; who should give up his own pleasant, healthy residence and live among those he desires to benefit; who should give up his own lucrative profession and engage in the same kind of labour they are engaged in; who should put himself, with his education, his right views of what life should and might be, at their disposal; and should thus be among them a continua [ example and help. He would thus make their wrongs his own wrongs, and as he raised himself raise his class. D.

HOMILIES BY J.A. MACDONALD

Vers. 1-17.

The pedigree. The book of the genealogy, etc. This is not the general title of the First Gospel, but rather the particular title of these sixteen or seventeen verses. The scroll, or writing of divorcement, which the Talmudists say consisted exactly of twelve lines, is called a biblion , or book ( <401907>Matthew
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

19:7). So the book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ may be understood to describe the single skin on which the words immediately before us were originally written. Vitringa remarks that the expression concerning the names in the book of life, in <660305>Revelation 3:5, alludes to the genealogical tables of the Jewish priests (see <150262>Ezra 2:62; <160764>Nehemiah 7:64), as the white raiment mentioned there does to the priestly dress.

I. THIS IS THE GENEALOGY OF JESUS AS THE CHRIST.

1 . This is implied in his description. The Son of David, the Son of Abraham. (1) David had many sons. So had he very many descendants. Abraham had a still mole numerous posterity. But amidst all the sons of David and of Abraham Jesus is the Son (see Bishop Middleton, Gr. Art., p. 163),. So likewise is he the Son of man. Here is a mark of surpassing excellence. In the whole human family there is no one to compare with him, personally, officially, relatively. (2) These titles indicate him to be the Seed promised in the covenant, and the Seed to whom also the blessings of the covenant are promised. God made his covenant unto Abraham and his Seed. Mark, not seeds , as of many; but as of one , which is Christ ( <480316>Galatians 3:16). In him all the families of the earth are blessed. 2 . To assert this is obviously the evangelist s intention. So we understand his words, genealogy of Jesus the Christ. (1) Jesus is the Antitype of all sacredly anointed persons prophets, priests, kings. He alone united in himself all these offices. (2) His anointing and Christship were of the Holy Ghost. The oil of anointing typified the Spirit of God. (a) In its lustre. Hence the unction of the Holy One is said to convey spiritual teaching and heavenly knowledge ( <620220>1 John 2:20, 27).

(b) In its softening, mollifying, lubricating influences. So the oil of anointing is put for the graces of the Holy Spirit. (c) Jesus was anointed with the oil of gladness above his fellows, viz. not only in the kited , but also in the degree. He received the Spirit not by measure.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

(3) How favoured are the sons of Jesus! They are through him the seed of the covenant (see <480329>Galatians 3:29). They are Christians , anointed ones, viz. in a spiritual and very noble sense ( <470121>2 Corinthians 1:21).

II. THE PEDIGREE IS GIVEN FOR OUR BENEFIT.

1 . Jesus had no personal glory from it. (1) Some of the ancestors were princes of the aristocracy of Virtue Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, David, Asa, Jehoshaphat, Hezekiah, Josiah, Zerubbabel. But Jesus himself was immeasurably superior to the best of them. (2) Some were persons of sullied fame Rehoboam, Abijah, Uzziah, Ahaz, Manasseh, Amon, Jechoniah. Note: (a) Virtue does not run in the blood. (b) Jesus appeared in the likeness of sinful flesh. (c) None are too vile to be saved by him. 2 . To us it certifies his Messiahship. (1) The patriarchs from David upwards were common ancestors of Joseph and Mary. The later patriarchs in this list were ancestors of Joseph the husband of Mary, therefore here, of Jesus putatively , who was supposed to be the Son of Joseph. Yet as the reputed or adopted Son of Joseph his title to the throne of David was valid. (2) But that Jesus was also the Son of David in blood as well as in law is evident from the genealogy in Luke, which carries his line up through Mary. Joseph, whose lather was Jacob according to Matthew, is in Luke called the son of Heli (viz. jure matrimonii ) , in compliance with the Jewish custom of tracing all genealogies through males. Every way, then, whether by law or by blood, Jesus is proved to be the Son of David the king (ver. 67, and entitled to the throne.

(3) In these genealogies there are difficulties which we are now in no position to solve. These, however, were no difficulties to the contemporaries of the evangelists, familiar with Hebrew customs and having access to the national records. It is too late, now the records are lost, for sceptics to make capital out of these difficulties. (4) But, on the other hand, the records being lost, no pretender to Messiahship can now establish descent from David. Surely the Jews, who
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

require this mark, should be convinced that Jesus, in whom alone it is found, is very Christ (cf. <401223>Matthew 12:23; 21:9; 22:447. (5) He is the Son of David in the grandest sense, viz. that of being also Davids Lord. Attributes of Divinity are ascribed by King David to the Kings Son (see e.g. Psalm 72.), which by no pretence of Oriental hyperbole can be limited to Solomon. These superhuman claims, in which lie the source and secret of all the blessings of salvation, Jesus asserted for himself and fully vindicated. 3 . It encourages the hope of the Gentiles. (1) Significant of this gracious end, we notice that the seed of the covenant was conveyed through younger sons. Abraham himself was a younger son of Terah; so was Isaac of Abraham; so was Jacob of Isaac; so was Judah of Jacob. Phares and Zara are both mentioned in the genealogy, evidently to emphasize this principle; for here Pharos, the younger of the twins, was chosen. David likewise was a younger son of Jesse. And in the family of David, Solomon the ancestor of Joseph, and Nathan the ancestor of Mary, were both younger sons (of. <421511>Luke 15:11-32; also <450912>Romans 9:12, 30). (2) Note, further, that of the four women, beside the virgin, whose names are introduced, two were Gentiles, viz Rahab and Ruth (3) The children of the promise whether Jew or Gentile, ever have been counted for the seed. It was so in the family of Abraham. It is so in the family of Jesus ( <480329>Galatians 3:29). Election is through faith. The Old Testament begins with the generation of the heartens and the earth; the New, with the generation of him by whom they were created. The glory of the gospel exceeds not only that of the Law , but that also of the material world. Jesus, in his incarnation, became the Beginning of the [new] creation of God. He is the Firstborn of every creature, viz. the Head and Archetype of that new creation which is to consist of those who are born again of him. J.A.M.

Vers. 18 -25. Josephs testimony. After giving the genealogy of Jesus, the evangelist proceeds to furnish important particulars of the history of his generation and birth. In these he brings out prominently the notable testimony of Joseph in proof of the Christship of Jesus. We note
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

I. THAT JOSEPH IS A CREDIBLE WITNESS.

1 . He was a righteous man. (1) This is the character claimed for him by Matthew at a time when, if it were not a fact, it might have been challenged; for Joseph was well known (see <401355>Matthew 13:55; <420422>Luke 4:22; <430642>John 6:42). According to Eusebius, this Gospel was written in the third year of Caligula, i.e. A . D . 41, when many of Josephs contemporaries were still living. (2) Everything recorded of Joseph is consistent with this character. It is in particular well sustained by his conduct towards Mary, under the trying circumstances detailed in the text. He might have prosecuted her for adultery (see <052223>Deuteronomy 22:23, 24). But he had an option of mercy, which he preferred. He resolved accordingly to put her away privily, viz. by giving her, in presence of two witnesses, a bill of divorcement, without assigning any cause (see <052401>Deuteronomy 24:1). Thus her life would be spared. Note: (a) True righteousness is merciful. Of this the gospel of our salvation furnishes glorious illustration. (b) Leniency devoid of justice is not true mercy. The terrors of the Lord, as well as those of the Law, are necessary to the public good of the universe. (3) As a righteous man Joseph could not be guilty of falsehood. This must hold under ordinary conditions, but especially in this case, where the subject of testimony is momentous, involving everlasting issues. 2 . He was a sensible man. (1) He certainly was not over-credulous, else he might have listened without demurrer to Marys story. There is no mention here of Gabriels message to Mary (see <420126>Luke 1:26-38). The omission suggests that Matthews design was to bring out prominently the evidence of Joseph. Yet that Mary had

communicated these things to Joseph may be reasonably presumed. She made no secret of them (see <420146>Luke 1:46-55). (2) There were not wanting good reasons by which he might have been inclined to listen to this wonderful story.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

(a) He had sufficient knowledge of Marys previous piety to have disposed him to credit her testimony; but the circumstances are unprecedented, and he is not satisfied. (b) He had the testimony of Elisabeth (see <420139>Luke 1:39-56), which was weighty when taken in connection with the vision of Zacharias, the remarkable event of the Baptists birth, and Zachariass prophecy (see Luke 1:67-79). Still, he was not satisfied. Note: Never was mother so honoured and so tried as Mary. Let not those who aspire to honours think to escape trials. As Mary suffered with Christ and for his sake, so shall we if Christ be formed in us (cf. <440541>Acts 5:41; 9:16; <450817>Romans 8:17; <500129> Philippians 1:29).
<420167>

3 . He had the best opportunities of knowledge. (1) As espoused to Mary he was in the best position to be acquainted with the matter of her testimony. (2) He was therefore in the best position to he convinced by the complementary evidence furnished in the vision vouchsafed to himself. (3) Of this vision he was, of course, a first-rate witness, for he was himself the subject of it.

II. THAT HIS TESTIMONY IS VERY VALUABLE.

1. Because of the importance of the subject. (1) The subject is stupendous. The incarnation of Deity in human nature. Immanuel. (2) Such an event must be of the utmost moment to humanity. It presages the beatification of humanity. In this all partakers of flesh and blood must have the

deepest interest. (3) This is wonderful news for sinners. And such are we all. Note: Not only was the incarnation of Jehovah necessary for redemption, but faith in Jesus as Jehovah is necessary for salvation. The very name of Jesus associates Jehovah and salvation (cf. <440316>Acts 3:16; 4:10; 9:14; <451013> Romans 10:13). 2 . Because of the nature of its authentication. (1) An angel appeared to Joseph. Superhuman intelligence alone could reveal the subject.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

(2) He appeared to him in a dream. Not an ordinary, but a Divine, dream. Such dreams carried with them convincing evidence. Else they could not serve their purpose (cf. <041206>Numbers 12:6; <051301>Deuteronomy 13:1-3; <092806>1 Samuel 28:6, 15; <290228>Joel 2:28). The evidence was convincing to Joseph. It reassured him of the innocence of Mary, and certified the truth of her wonderful story. It let in also the evidence of Elisabeth in its full force. The whole was confirmed by the correspondence of prophetic times, which had now awakened a general expectation. (3) The sequel proved that Joseph was not misled. (a) He had the sign that Mary should bring forth a Son. God alone could certainly forecast this. (b) That Son was to support the character of a Divine Saviour of sinners. Who but God could have foreseen that this Child would ever claim to be such a Saviour, much less that he should behave miraculously consistently with that most difficult and lofty claim? 3 . Because of its consistency with Scripture. (1) The miracle of the virgin-mother was a prominent subject of ancient prophecy. (a) It dawned in the first promise ( <010315>Genesis 3:15), that the Seed of the woman, viz. without the man the issue therefore of a virgin should bruise the serpents head. (b) It is explicitly set forth by Isaiah ( <230714>Isaiah 7:14) in the passage cited in the text. Here we note the definite article not a virgin, but the virgin ( hml [h ). One only such occurrence was ever to take place. (2) Another notable circumstance is that, according to Isaiah, the house of David was not to fair until this wonder should be accomplished. The sign was given

expressly to reassure that house, now fearing extinction, when, after the slaughter perpetrated by Pekah, Judah was again invaded by Rezin. But, excepting in Jesus, the family of David is now difficult to trace. Surely this ought to convince the Jews that Jesus is the Christ. The certainty of our faith is established by many infallible proofs. Unreasonableness is with unbelief.

III. THE HAND OF GOD IS EVIDENT IN THE HISTORY.

<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

1 . Wisely ordered was the espousal of Mary to Joseph , not only to give value to his testimony, but also to shield the reputation of the virgin, and to afford her and her infant a needful earthly guardianship. Note: A providence that is equal to all emergencies may well be trusted by Christians. 2 . It is also a significant circumstance that Jesus received his name at the time of his circumcision. To give the name at such a time was the common custom ( <420159>Luke 1:59, 60). But in this case the name of Jesus was most appropriately given when that blood was first shed without which there is no remission of sins. The sign of circumcision had its perfect accomplishment in the shedding of the blood of the covenant upon the cross. 3 . This .Name , with its reason , are a blessed revelation. There is no salvation but from sin. Sin carries its own punishment. The removal of sin is the remission of punishment. Infinite mercy can only save sinners from punishment by saving them from sin. 4 . Jesus becomes incarnate again in every regenerate spirit. The reconciliation of the human to the Divine was first effected in the Person of Christ. As Christ is formed in us we become reconciled to God. Christ grows up in us as we grow up into him. The life of faith is a life of miracle. J.A.M.

HOMILIES BY R. TUCK
Ver. 1. The mission of genealogies. The Gospels contain two genealogies of Jesus the Messiah. Both relate to Joseph the reputed father of Jesus, and to Mary by virtue of her relation as wife, or her family relation, to him. Matthews is the transcript of the public record, and traces the family line in a descending scale from Abraham; Lukes is the private family genealogy, and it traces the family line in an ascending scale up to Adam. Matthew takes the point of view of a Jew; Luke sees in Messiah a Saviour for

humanity. It has been suggested that the Jew bore two names what may be called a religious name, which would be used in the sacred records; and what may be called a secular name, which would be used in the civil lists. This may account for diversity in the forms of the names in these two genealogies.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

I. THE COMMON MISSION OF GENEALOGIES. Everybody does not

jealously guard the family records. But some do. They are felt to be important: 1 . When there is family property. This is illustrated in the case of the Israelites. The land of Canaan was divinely allotted to the families, and it was inalienable (see the year of jubilee, and Naboths refusal to give up his garden). Any one claiming land in Canaan was bound to show the family register. 2 . When there were class privileges. Illustrate by the inability of some, in the time of the restoration, to prove their priestly or Levitical connections. See the jealousy with which membership in Indian castes is preserved. 3 . When any one becomes famous. At once we want to know who he is; what are his belongings; who are his forbears. An idea that no man is a distinct and separate individual. We are all products. We all belong to the past. Those who have been live over again in their sons. So in a biography we always want to know a mans ancestry. Show that there is this common interest in Jesus, and it is fully met, and met in such a way as to secure a supreme interest in him.

II. THE SACRED MISSION OF GENEALOGIES. They become proofs of the

Messiahship of Jesus. Prophecy fixed one condition. Messiah would belong to the royal house of David. Now, observe that during Christs life this was never once disputed. The Sanhedrin kept the public archives; and though Herod the Great sought out and burnt all the family registers he could, the enemies of Christ never attempted to disprove his claim to belong to the royal race. Evidently the public genealogies confronted them and served this sacred purpose. Ulla, a rabbi of the third century, says, Jesus was treated in an exceptional way, because he was of the royal race. R.T. Ver. 1. Messiahs Sonships. The writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews, in a most significant and emphatic way,

points out the distinct feature of the last Divine revelation: God, having of old time spoken unto the fathers in the prophets by divers portions and in divers manners, hath at the end of these days spoken unto us in his Son ( ejn uiJw~| ). Sonship declaring Fatherhood in God is the very essence of the revelation in Christ. That point is illustrated in the
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

genealogies in a very striking way. Jesus is set forth as the Son of David; he is more, he is the Son of Abraham; he is more, he is the Son of Adam; he is more, he is even the Son of God. If this seems to be less prominent in Matthews descending genealogy, it is very prominent in Lukes ascending one. Putting all these Sonships together, we get the following impressions concerning the claims of Jesus.

I. HE WAS TRUE KING. Son of David; lineal descendant of King David.

With actual, natural, legitimate right to the sovereignty of Davids land. In our Lords time there was no other claimant to Davids throne. Herod would have made short work in dealing with any such claimant. He tried to destroy the ChildKing Jesus. Jesus was Davids legitimate and only Heir.

II. HE WAS TRUE JEW. Son of Abraham. This was indeed involved in his
being Son of David, since David was a son of Abraham; but for the satisfaction of the Jews the Abrahamic descent is assured. Salvation is of the Jews. Messiah must come in the Abrahamic line. He must be the Seed of Abraham, in whom all nations of the earth are to be blessed.

III. HE WAS TRUE MAN. Son of Adam. Luke, writing for Gentiles, goes
beyond all Jewish limitations, and sets forth the true, proper, common humanity of Christ, and the interest of all humanity in him. For if salvation is of the Jew , it is salvation for the whole world. God so loved the world. Jesus belongs to the Jewish race, and that is important. He is the Crown and Flowering of that race. But Jesus belongs to humanity, and that is more important. He is the Hope of the human race; the Life and Light of men.

IV. HE WAS DIVINE MAN. Son of God. There is a sense in which this may
be said of every man; there is a special sense in which it is said of Christ. He brings a new force of Divine life to start a new spiritual race, even as Adam had a special Divine life to start a human race. In him was life. R.T. Vers. 3, 5.

Strange links in genealogical chains. It must strike every reader as singular, that the women introduced in the genealogies are of doubtful character or of foreign relations. The mention of the four women, Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, and Bathsheba, in such a pedigree is very significant. Tamar, the forgotten one, twice left a childless widow;
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

Rahab, not only of the accursed seed of the Canaanites, but moreover a harlot; Ruth, also a long-childless widow, and a stranger, and born of the stock of Moab, that nation of incestuous origin, forbidden to enter the house of the Lord unto the tenth generation; and lastly, the wife of Uriah, the very mention of whom, under this designation, only draws attention to her sin; all these are seen incorporated into the line of the children of Abraham, nay, more, into the holy genealogy of Christ. What can it be intended that these strange links should teach us?

I. MANS WILFULNESS IS NOT ALLOWED TO HINDER. GODS

PURPOSES. Marriage of Jews beyond the limits of the nation was strictly forbidden; and such marriages were a fruitful source of evil, as, is illustrated in the times of Balaam and of Nehemiah. We can clearly see mans wilfulness in the marriages of Rahab and Ruth, who were both foreigners, and worse than wilfulness in Davids marrying Bathsheba. Such wilfulness we might expect would thwart the Divine purpose for the race; but instead, it was overruled. Gods thought cannot be frustrated. If man resists, he will simply be borne along on the current of Gods outworking purpose.

II. GOD LETS CHARACTER TRIUMPH OVER MERE RACEDISABILITIES. This is illustrated in the cases of Rahab and Ruth, the fine illustrations of faith in God and of the loyalty of sincere love. That faith ennobled a Canaanite in the sight of God. That loyalty of love beautified a Moabite in the sight of God. And so our Lord taught that the humbled, penitent, believing publicans and harlots entered his kingdom rather than Abraham-born Jews, who had nothing to boast of but a pedigree.

III. GENTILES HAVE A CLEAR CLAIM TO THE BENEFITS OF

MESSIAHS WORK. They have an actual part in him. The blood of two Gentile mothers is in the Saviour of the world. The Gentiles need rest in no mere permission to share Jewish privilege: they can claim their rights in Jesus. He is a Light to lighten the Gentiles. R.T. Ver. 18.

The mystery of the Incarnation. Christianity starts with a miracle. It is a miracle altogether so stupendous and so unique that its reception settles the whole question of the possibility of the miraculous. He who can believe that God shadowed himself to our apprehension in the likeness of a man, he who can recognize in the Babe of
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

Bethlehem, both the Son of God and the Son of Mary, will find that no equal demand is ever afterwards made upon his faculty of faith. Both Testaments begin with a miracle. A world of order and beauty arising out of chaos is a miracle as truly as is the birth of a divinely human Saviour by the Divine overshadowing of Mary. We ask how these things were done, but the mystery eludes all human explanations. In the whole circle of causes yet searched out by man, there are none which help us to trace the mystery. We ask why , and then for us the mystery of wisdom and grace is allowed to unfold a little. Two influences affected the truth of the Incarnation in the time of the apostles Judaism tended to overpress the mere humanity of Christ; Gnosticism tended to dissipate the humanity into a mere appearance.

I. ON WHAT PRINCIPLE is THE INCARNATION FOUNDED. It is

essentially a revelation , and it rests upon the principle that man can only be taught the truth concerning God, and saved from his sins, by a revelation. Man is made a moral being by receiving a revelation of the will of God. Man is redeemed by receiving a revelation of the-mercy of God. What man precisely needs is a revelation of Gods character; it must be shown to him in human spheres. That is the Incarnation, God manifest in the flesh.

II. WHAT FORM DID THE INCARNATION TAKE? We may gain the best
ideas by noticing what it was not. 1 . God did not put on the mere appearance of humanity. This was the error of the Docetae. To correct this the evangelists give details of our Lords birth into veritable humanity. 2 . God did not assume to himself a human body. That is, he did not find a human body, and come into it, as the hermit-crab will find, and enter into, an empty shell. Scripture says he was made man. 3 . God did not take any particular class or kind of humanity. He was just the worlds Babe, the worlds Man. R.T.

Ver. 18. The Holy Ghost before Pentecost. We are so accustomed to associate the term Holy Ghost with the descent of the Spirit on the disciples at Pentecost, that it seems strange to us to find it used by the evangelists even in the early portions of their Gospels. But there is no proper authority for connecting the term exclusively with
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

Pentecost. Properly speaking, there is nothing peculiar or distinctive in the term. Spirit and Ghost are synonyms. Holy Spirit may properly be put wherever Holy Ghost is found. Nothing is added to our knowledge by using the term Ghost. Whenever God is spoken of in the Scripture as working within things, out of sight, in the spheres of thought and feeling, he is spoken of as God the Spirit , or God the Ghostly. The Old Testament is full of statements concerning the working of Gods Spirit in creation; in the antediluvians; in the kings; in the prophets. God works in the created spheres in two ways. 1 . In external spheres, and in modes apprehensible by human senses. 2 . In internal spheres, and in modes apprehensible by the feeling, the mind, and the will. Gods secret workings are to be regarded as the operations of his Spirit. So the mysterious putting forth of Divine power in the case of Mary is properly presented as the working of the Holy Ghost.

I. GOD WORKING IN THE MINDS OF MEN IS THE UNIVERSAL TRUTH

OF. THE HOLY GHOST. This belongs exclusively to no one age, to no one dispensation, to no one race. To the heathen God is the great Spirit. Moved by thee, the prophets wrote and spoke. There is this inspiration of the Almighty which giveth understanding, as the common heritage of the race; and special forms it takes, within Jewish lines, only illustrate the universal forms it takes for all humanity.

II. GOD USING, AS HIS AGENCY, THE LIFE AND WORDS AND WORKS
OF JESUS, IS THE SPECIAL CHRISTIAN TRUTH OF THE HOLY GHOST. So Jesus said, He shall take of mine, and shall show it unto you; He shall bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you. The Holy Ghost of the early Church is the Holy Spirit of the Church of all the ages, only his instruments are precise; his agency is limited. He works through the outer revelation which has been brought to men by Christ, and is given to men in Christ. R.T. Ver. 19.

Justice is considerateness. Very little is known concerning Joseph the husband of Mary; and yet enough is known to reveal a character. And what more especially shows him up to our view is his determination to do what was right, but to do it kindly. According to Jewish ideas, betrothal was as sacred as marriage, and infidelities before marriage were treated as infidelities after marriage, and
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

death by stoning was the punishment for such sins. It was customary for persons to be engaged, or espoused, for twelve months, and during that time the persons did not see each other. Mary had to tell Joseph, and Joseph had to act under the circumstances in the way that seemed best. He was a just man, but he was a kind man. No doubt what Mary told him made a great demand on his faith. He does not seem to have been able to receive her mysterious story until his mind was divinely guided; then he married Mary, and at the time that Jesus was born Joseph was her recognized husband.

I. THE JUST MAN WANTS TO DO THE RIGHT. But it is always difficult to

decide what is right when other people are affected by our decision. When we have to judge the conduct of others we easily make mistakes. We judge as if persons acted from the motives which decide our action. It was easy for Joseph to explain Marys conduct, and see quite sufficient ground for refusing any further relations with her. And in forming judgment on such grounds, he would have been altogether wrong, and he would have unworthily dealt with Mary. She was no wilful sinner; she had only come into the sovereign power and grace of God. In trying to be just there is grave danger of our becoming most unjust. See Elis suspicion of Hannah.

II. THE JUST MAN WANTS TO DO THE KIND. Noble-minded men let
mercy tone judgment. Ignoble-minded men love to persecute, and call it punishment. Charity hideth sin; is jealous concerning imperilled reputation; and suffers most deeply when punishment must be inflicted. So Gods mercy loves to rejoice over judgment. R.T. Ver. 20. Dreams as revelations. It has been said that dreams represent the usual mode of Divine communication with persons who are outside the covenant. But this view is not fully maintained by a study of all the incidents narrated. It is true of Abimelech ( <012003>Genesis 20:3-7), of Laban ( <013124>Genesis 31:24), of Pharaohs butler and baker

( <014005>Genesis 40:5-19), of Pharaoh ( <014101>Genesis 41:1- 7), of the Midianite ( <070713>Judges 7:13-15), of Nebuchadnezzar ( <270201>Daniel 2:1, 31; 4:5, 8), of the Wise Men ( <400211>Matthew 2:11, 12), of Pilates wife ( <402719>Matthew 27:19). But it is not true of Jacob ( <012812>Genesis 28:12; 31:10), of Joseph ( <013705>Genesis 37:5-9), of Solomon ( <110305>1 Kings 3:5-15), of Daniel (Daniel 7.), or of Joseph ( <400120>Matthew 1:20, 21; 2:13,
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

19, 20). It is said that communication by dreams is the lowest form of revelation, because it deals with man when the senses and the will are asleep, and the panorama of the contents of the mind keeps passing, and there is no intelligent selection and arrangement of them. Dreams are much regarded in heathen religions. They are very sparingly used in the Jehovah- religion; and all Divine directions, whether by dreams or otherwise, are dependent upon the inward earnestness and sincerity of the heart. Perhaps it may be said that God used dreams in revealing his will to those who were not specially sensitive to spiritual things. Poets, prophets, mystics, see visions. Common men, or men in ordinary moods and conditions of mind, dream dreams , which God fills with meaning. See how far this is illustrated in the several cases mentioned above. Note that Joseph takes no place as a prophet or specially gifted or spiritual man; and therefore what may be called the commonplace mode of Divine communication was employed in his case.

I. DREAMS ARE USUALLY WITHOUT SIGNIFICANCE. They represent the

workings of the mind apart from the control of the will. They may or may not be connected. They may or may not be remembered. They bear no relation to character or culture. They can only nourish superstition if unduly regarded.

II. DREAMS ARE SOMETIMES FULL OF DIVINE SIGNIFICANCE. NO

sphere of mans life can be thought of as beyond Gods control and use. He can be the will that guides, shapes, arranges, our dreams, so that they shall convey to us some message from him. He has done this. He still does this. Though his working in us, by the movings and guidings of the Holy Ghost, makes special and external forms of revelation seldom, if ever, necessary. R.T. Ver. 21. A mission revealed in a twofold Name. The fact confronts us, and sets us upon earnest inquiry, that one name was prophesied for Messiah, and another name was given to him when he came. He was to be called Immanuel, and he was called Jesus. Now, are we to

understand that these are two names, and that Messiah is to be known as Immanuel-Jesus? or are we to see in the name Jesus a full and sufficient embodiment of the idea contained in the name Immanuel? Jewish names, and especially prophetic names, carry definite and precise meanings; they embody facts or suggest missions.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

I. THE MESSIANIC NAMES TREATED AS TWO.

1 . Take the prophetic name Immanuel, or Emmanuel. The secondary reference of the prophecy in Isaiah is to the Messiah; the first reference is to some one who should deliver the nation from its immediate troubles (see Commentary on <230714>Isaiah 7:14). The name carried the assurance God is with us. But that assurance involved more than the fact of Divine presence. If God is near, he is near to help. If God manifests himself, he manifests himself to deliver and to save. Christ, then, is God with us, sensibly present, manifest in the flesh. With us he is active to help and save. 2 . Take the angel-given name Jesus. This is a common Jewish name. It is the Greek form of the familiar Joshua; but it has a significance and a history. It is really Hoshea , or Hoshua , the Helper, with the name of God added as a prefix, Je-hoshua , shortened to Joshua. So it means in full, God our Helper. But, in the dream, a very full translation of the name was given. It was said to declare Messiahs mission to be saving the people from their sins, and from their sins is designedly set in contrast with from their troubles, so that the moral and spiritual character of the mission should be made quite plain.

II. THE MESSIANIC NAMES TREATED AS ONE. Take the simple meaning
of Jesus, Je-hoshua ; it is God with us helping. But that is precisely the thought embodied in Emmanuel, which is God with us, and the connection declares that God is thought of as with us to help us. Then the same mission is declared in both names. It is the fact that our supreme need arises out of our sins that decides the sphere of the Divine helping. R.T. Ver. 22. Scripture fulfilments. It is plain that the Jews used their Old Testament Scriptures in ways that do not commend themselves to us. To-day rabbis can find references and proofs in passages which, to our more orderly and logical minds, seem to have no bearing

on the subject. They have always been readily carried away by similarity in the sound of passages. Strict criticism cannot approve of their quotations or recognize their intelligent connections. We are to remember that one supreme idea possessed the mind of the Jew. He looked for Messiah; everything was full of Messiah; everything pointed to Messiah. The Jews were ready to find references to Messiah everywhere.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

So when they believed Messiah had come, they naturally turned to the old Scripture, and matched the facts of his life with all the Messianic references. We are more critical than they; we have a keener historical sense; and so we have learned to regard the Messianic allusions as secondary references, the prophecies bearing a first relation to the times in which they were uttered. St. Matthew is presenting Jesus as the Messiah promised to the Jews; and he brings into special prominence, through the whole of his narrative, that harmony between the events and the prophecies by which Jesus is marked out as the Christ. The formula that it might be fulfilled is like a refrain repeated in every page of the book. In the two first chapters we find five detached incidents of the childhood of Jesus connected with five prophetic sayings. This Gospel is the demonstration of the rights of sovereignty of Jesus over Israel as their Messiah. The importance of Scripture fulfilments may be shown by illustrating the two following points.

I. AN INDEPENDENT REVELATION IS INCONCEIVABLE. If God is

pleased to work by revelations, we may be quite sure that those revelations are related; and we expect them to be given in an ascending scale; the roots of all later revelations are sure to be found in the earlier ones. An independent revelation is at once stamped with suspicion. If its connections cannot be shown, its trustworthiness may be denied. True revelations had been given to the Jews. New revelations must confirm their truth, and be their unfolding. Conceive what would have been said if Jesus had appeared making independent claim as Messiah, heedless of all connection between his revelation and preceding ones. Without hesitation we say that, in such a case, his claim could not have been justified. The Scripture must be fulfilled.

II. AN ANTAGONISTIC REVELATION MUST BE REJECTED. It would

have been the all-sufficing answer for the Pharisees, if only they could have given it Scripture is opposed to the claims of this Jesus of Nazareth. But they never dared attempt to prove antagonism between his revelation and the previous one. Disciples and apostles, and even our Lord himself in his teachings, fully combat the idea of antagonism. He came not to destroy the Law and the prophets, but to fulfil. He was able, beginning at Moses and all the prophets, to expound in all the Scripture the things concerning himself. To him give all

the prophets witness. R.T.

<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

FOOTNOTES
For the exposition of vers. 1-17 I am greatly indebted to the manuscript notes of the Rev. J. Rawson Lumby, D.D., Norrisian Professor of Divinity at Cambridge. A.L.W.
ft1

<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

MATTHEW
CHAPTER 2.
EXPOSITION.
JESUS THE CHRIST BY HIS EARLY HISTORY answering to the word of God by the prophets. This is shown by four particulars, for each of which a corresponding prophecy is adduced. (1) The place of his birth; where, further, he receives homage of Gentiles, though neglected by his own people (vers. 1-12). (2) His stay in Egypt (vers. 13-15). (3) The slaughter of the innocents (vers. 16-18). (4) His dwelling at Nazareth, and consequent appellation (vers. 1923). Of these naturally the first is the most important, and it may indeed be that the chief object of the evangelist was to show that Jesus satisfied the conditions of prophecy with respect to his birth. He was only driven from Bethlehem to Egypt and subsequently to Nazareth by the jealousy of the ruler of the Jews. While, however, the fulfilment of prophecy by Jesus the Christ was doubtless the most prominent thought in the evangelists mind, the typical character of the treatment received cannot but have forced itself upon him, writing as he did at a time when the contrast between the Lords rejection by Jews and his reception by Gentiles was becoming daily more marked. It is, further, not impossible that the spread of the gospel to other lands may in itself have proved a stumbling-block to the Jews, who made so much of the superior sanctity of Palestine, and that there may be in this chapter something of the same thought that moved St. Stephen to insist on the fact that Gods presence is not tied to one spot or country (Acts 7.).

Vers. 1-12. Born at Bethlehem , according to prophecy , he receives there the homage of representatives of the , heathen world. Ver. 1. Now when Jesus ; who has just been identified with Christ. But in this chapter the narrative employs only those terms (Jesus, young
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

Child) which bystanders might have used. They are purely annalistic, not interpretative. Contrast <400118>Matthew 1:18 and Herods statement of a theelogical problem (ver. 4). Was born in Bethlehem. The First Gospel, if taken alone would give the impression that Joseph had had no previous connexion with Nazareth. But about the place where Joseph and Mary lived before the birth of Jesus the evangelist did not concern himself (cf ver. 23, note). Of Judaea . For the evangelists purpose it was most important so to define it as to exclude Bethlehem of Zebulun ( <061915>Joshua 19:15). The inhabitants of Bethlehem of Judaea, a market town of a fruitful (Ephratah) district, live chiefly by agriculture, but also for several centuries have manufactured images of saints, rosaries, and fancy articles. Since 1834: it has been almost exclusively occupied by Christians (Socins Baedeker, p. 243, seq.). From the House of Bread came forth the true Bread. In the days of Herod the king . Herod the Great and Herod Agrippa II. ( <442513>Acts 25:13) alone held the legal title of king for any time (but cf. <401401>Matthew 14:1, note) the former as King of the Jews (Josephus, Bell. Jud., 1:14.4), or King of the Idumaeans and Samaritans (Appian, Civ., 5:75; vide Schurer, 1:1. 340), by a decree of an express meeting of the Roman senate, B . C . 40; the latter by Claudiuss appointment, as king first of Chalcis ( A . D . 48-53) and afterwards ( A . D . 53100) of the tetrarchies of Philip and Lysanias (Josephus, Bell. Jud., 2:12. 8; 13. 2), although Herod Antipas was so spoken of by courtesy ( infra , <401409> Matthew 14:9). As the date of Agrippa II. is quite out of the question, we are almost compelled by this phrase alone to recognize the date of Christs birth as falling in the lifetime of Herod the Great. Herod the Great died in the spring of A.U.C. 750, our B . C . 4 (Schiirer, 1:1. 466), and as our Lord was born at least forty days earlier, for the purification in the temple must have taken place before Herods massacre of the innocents, he cannot have been born later than the very beginning of B . C . 4, or the end of B . C . 5. Indeed, upon the most natural deduction from ver. 16, he must have been born some months earlier. The Church, from the days of Justin Martyr (Ap., 1:32), has loved to see in the abolition by Rome of the kingdom of the Jews at the death of Herod, of its native dynasty by Herods usurnation (Origen, Genesis Hom., 17:6), the fulfilment of Jacobs prophecy

( <014910>Genesis 49:10). Behold, there came Wise Men from the East . The true order, as given in the Revised Version, lays the emphasis on the office, and in a subordinate degree on the home of the strangers Wise Men from the East came. This translation also hints at the full meaning of the verb ( parege>nonto ) , of which the connotation is not of the place a quo, but of the publicity of their appearance at the place in quo (cf. <400301>Matthew
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

3:1). Wise Men ( Ma>goi ); astromyens (Wickliffe); rages (Rheims). On this word see especially Schrader (Cuneitbrm Inscriptions and the Old Testament) on <243903>Jeremiah 39:3. He considers it to be in origin not Iranian (Medo-Persian), but Babylonian, and to have primarily meant either one who is deep whether in power and reputation or in insight, or one who has fulness of power. It was, perhaps, at first used with special reference to astrologers and interpreters of dreams, and, passing from Babylonia to Media, it became the name of the Median priestly order. In the latter sense it is probably used here. In Acts 1 3:6-8 it, apparently by reversion, is used in its wider meaning. Of the number and rank of those who now came absolutely nothing is known. Of greater importance is Ciceros statement (De Div., 1:41), Nee quisquam rex Persarum potest esse, qui non ante magorum disciplinam scientiamque perceperit. These Magi spontaneously submit to the Babe. From the East. The proper home of the Magi would thus be Media, and, from the length of time employed on their journey (ver. 16), it is probable that by the East we must here understand Media or some other part of the kingdom, of Parthia, into which Media had been mostly absorbed, and in which, in fact, the Magi were now greatly honoured. Many , however ( e.g. Lightfoot, Her. Hebr.; and Edersheim, Life, etc., 1:203, who points out that a Jewish kingdom of Yemen then existed), think that these Magi came from Arabia; and with this the tradition, evidently received by Justin Martyr and frequently referred to by him ( oiJ ajpo< jArrabi>av Ma>goi , Trypho, 77, 78, 88, 102; cf. Reseh, Agrapha, p. 471), perhaps agrees. But Justins own opinion was that they came from Damascus, which was and is a part of the land of Arabia ( 78). It is noticeable that Justins tradition is confirmed by the Jerusalem Talmud (Ber., 2:4), which makes an Arabian tell a Jew that Messiah is born. The whole passage is worth quoting for its illustration of several details in this chapter. After this the children of Israel shall be converted, and shall inquire after the Lord their God, and David their king ( <280305>Hosea 3:5). Our rabbins say, That is King Messias, if he be among the living, his name is David, or if dead, David is his name. Rabbi Tanchum said, Thus I prove it: He sheweth mercy to David his Messiah ( <191850>Psalm 18:50). Rabbi Josua ben Levi saith, His name is jmx , a Branch ( <380308>Zechariah 3:8). Rabbi Judah bar Aibu saith, His name is

Menahem (that is, Para>klhtov , the Comforter). And that which happened to a certain Jew, as he was ploughing, agreeth with this business. A certain Arabian travelling, and hearing the ox bellow, said to the Jew at plough, O Jew, loose thy oxen, and loose thy ploughs, for, behold, the temple is laid waste! The ox bellowed the second time; the
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

Arabian saith to him, O Jew, Jew, yoke thy oxen, and fit thy ploughs: for, behold, King Messiah is born! But saith the Jew, What is his name? Menahem, saith he. And what is the name of his father? Hezekiah, saith the Arabian. To whom the Jew, But whence is he? The other answered, From the palace of the King of Bethlehem-Judah. Away he went, and sold his oxen, and his ploughs, and became a seller of infants swaddling-clothes, going about from town to town. When he came to that city (Bethlehem) all the women bought of him, but the mother of Menahem bought nothing. He heard the voice of the women saying, O thou mother of Menahem, thou mother of Menahem, carry thy son the things that are here sold. But she replied, May the enemies of Israel be strandded, because on the day that he was born the temple was laid waste. To whom he said, But we hoped, that as it was laid waste at his feet, so at his feet it would be built again. She saith, I have no money. To whom he replied, But why should this be prejudicial to him? Carry him what you buy here, and if you have no money to-day, after some days I will come back and receive it. After some days he returns to that city, and saith to her, How does the little infant? And she said, From the time you saw me last, spirits [winds] and tempests came, and snatched him away out of my hands. Rabbi Bon saith, What need have we to learn from an Arabian? Is it not plainly written, And Lebanon shall fall before the Powerful One? (Esa. 10:34). And what follows after? A Branch shall come out of the root of Jesse (Esa. 11:1) (Hor. Hebr., in loc. ) . To Jerusalem. The capital, where this King would reign, and where information about his birth would most naturally be obtained. Ver. 2. Saying . The inquiry was on their lips at the moment of their appearance. Where is? Not whether there is. The Magi show no signs of doubt. He that is born King of the Jews ; i.e. he that is born to be King of the Jews. Whether he is king from the very moment of his birth is not stated. The rendering of the Revised Version margin, Where is the King of the Jews that is born? would imply this. With either form the bystanders could hardly help contrasting him with their then ruler, who had acquired the kingship after years of conflict, and who was of foreign extraction. King of the Jews. Notice: (1) This was, perhaps, Herods exact title (ver. 1, note).

(2) They do not say king of the world. They accept the facts that the Jews alone expected this king, and that according to the more literal
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

interpretation of the Jewish prophecies the homage of the world would be rendered to him as the Head of the Jewish nation. (3) The title is not used of our Lord again until the Passion, where it is only used by heathen (Pilate and the soldiers, <402711>Matthew 27:11, 29, 37, and parallel passages, Mark, Luke, John, and especially <431921>John 19:21). The Magi and the Roman, learning and administration, East and West, acknowledge, at least in form, the King of the Jews. (4) The Jews themselves preferred the term, King of Israel ( <402742>Matthew 27:42; <411532>Mark 15:32, to which passages <422337>Luke 23:37, placing the gibe in the soldiers mouth, forms a significant contrast). The term Jews made them only one of the nations of the earth; Israel reminded them of their theocratic privileges. For . They state the reason of their certainty. We have seen ( we saw , Revised Version); at home. His star . In the way of their ordinary pursuits they learned of Christ. The observation of nature led them to natures Bond ( <510117>Colossians 1:17). What this star really was has been the subject of much consideration without any very satisfactory result. The principal theories are: (1) It was the conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter, which took place in May to July and again in September, B . C . 7. (2) It was the rising of Sirius on the same day in the fifth, fourth, third, and second years B . C . (3) It was some strange evanescent star such as Kepler saw in 1603-4. (4) Astronomy can suggest nothing which satisfies all the conditions, and the appearance must have been strictly miraculous. Since Professor Pritchards article in the Dictionary of the Bible, this last has been generally accepted in England. A further question is How came they to identify the star as his? i. e. What made the Magi connect the coming of the King of the Jews with a star? and what made them consider that this particular appearance was the one they

expected? The latter part of the question can hardly be answered, except on the supposition that the star that they saw was in itself so extraordinary as to convince them that no greater star could be looked for. To the former part various answers have been given. (1) Balaams prophecy ( <042417>Numbers 24:17) was understood literally, and the knowledge of it, with its misinterpretation, had spread to the Magi. For this literal interpretation, cf. the Pesikta Zutarta (Lekah Tob) on
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

<042417>

Numbers 24:17 (p. 58, Venice edit.), where it says that in the fifth year of the heptad before Messiah the star shall shine forth from the east,, and this is the star of the Messiah (cf. also Edersheim, Life, etc., 1:212). Similarly we find the false Messiah of the second century applying the term to himself Barcochab. (2) They had learned, by intercourse with Jews (cf. the influence of the Jewish Sibylline oracles on the fourth eclogue), that these latter expected a great King, and they had applied to his coming, as to all events, the science that they themselves practised. They believed fully in astrology, and the Divine ordering that a star should appear to them was a condescension to the then state of human knowledge. In the East ( ejnth~| ajnatolh~| ). Ellicott points out (Hist. Lects., p. 73) that to translate this at its rising seems to be at needless variance with the use of the same words in ver. 9, where they seem to stand in a kind of local antithesis to where the young Child was. For the phrase as referring to the Eastern part of the earth, cf. Clem. Romans, 5. It is more definite than the plural of ver. 1. And are come . We saw and came ( ei]domen h] lqomen ) without delay. To Worship him . Not as God, but as Lord and King ( <400409>Matthew 4:9, note). The prostration of themselves bodily before him ( proskunh~sai ; cf. also ver. 11) was not a Greek or Roman, but an Eastern, and it is said especially a Persian, form of homage. Ver. 3. When ; and when , Revised Version. There is a contrast ( de> ) between the eager question of the Magi and the feelings of Herod. Herod the king . In the true text the emphasis is not on the person (as in ver. 1, where the date was all-important), but on the office as then exercised. Tile king visibly regnant is contrasted with him who was born to be King. Heard. Through some of his many sources of information, for there were spies set everywhere (Josephus, Ant., 15:10. 4). These things ; it , Revised Version. Nothing is expressed in the original. He was troubled ; perplexed, agitated ( ejtara>cqh ). Fully in accordance with his jealous and suspicious character. For he had already slain, as actual or possible candidates for the throne, five of the Maccabean

princes and princesses, including his favourite wife Mariamne (thus extirpating the direct line) and also his two sons by Mariamne. Josephus (Ant., 17:2. 4; cf. Holtzmann) mentions a prediction of the Pharisees towards the end of Herods life, that God had decreed that Herods government should cease, and his posterity should be deprived of it. This seems to have a Messianic reference, though used at the time for an intrigue in favour of Pheroras, Herods brother. And all Jerusalem . The feminine (here only, pa~sajIeroso>luma )
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

points to a Hebrew source. The reason for the inhabitants of Jerusalem feeling troubled is generally explained, by their fear, which was in fact only too well justified by experience, that the news would excite Herod to fresh crimes. It is also possible that many would shrink from the changes which the coming of Messiah could not but bring. Present ease, though only comparative, is with the unbelieving preferable to possibilities of the highest blessedness. <402110>Matthew 21:10 affords both a parallel and a contrast. With him . In this respect Jerusalem was one with Herod ( <430111>John 1:11). Ver. 4. And when he had gathered together ( kai< sunagagw>n ). The Revised Version, and gathering together , suggests that there was no delay. All the chief priests and scribes of the people ( pa>ntavtou<v ajrcierei~v kai< grammatei~v tou~ laou~ ). In the absence of the article before grammatei~v we must take the words, of the people, as belonging to both terms. The addition helped to bring out the evangelists thought that the representatives of the chosen people ( <600210>1 Peter 2:10) were fully informed of the coming of Christ. The chief priests (cf. also <401621>Matthew 16:21, note) represented the ecclesiastical and Sadducean part, the scribes the more literary and probably the Pharisaic part, of the nation. The width of the term all, and the double classification, seem to point to this not being a meeting of the Sanhedrin as such. Herod called an informal and perhaps the more comprehensive meeting of those who could assist him. He demanded of them ; Revised Version, in quired , for demand is, in modern English, too strong for ejpunqa>neto The tyrant could be courteous when it served his purpose. Does the imperfect mark his putting the question to one after another (cf. <440106>Acts 1:6; and contrast <430452>John 4:52)? Where Christ ( the Christ , Revised Version) should be born ( genna~tai ). In ver. 2 ( oJ tecqei>v ) the stress lay on his birth as an accomplished fact. Here on his birth as connected with his origin The present is chosen, not the future, because Herod is stating a theological question without reference to time. Observe, in Herods inquiry and subsequent action, the combination of superstition and irreligion. He was willing to accept the witness of stars and of prophecies, but not willing to allow himself to be morally

influenced by it. His attempt to kill this Child was the expression of a desire to destroy the Jewish nationality so far as this was severed from himself, and perhaps with it to uproot at the same time a fundamental part of the Jewish religion.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

Ver. 5. And they said unto him, In Bethlehem of Judaea: for thus it is written by the prophet . For by the Revised Version margin has through ( <400122>Matthew 1:22, not,.). Ver. 6. And thou Bethlehem, in the land of Jude, art not the least among the princes of Juda: for out of thee shall come a Governor, that shall rule my people Israel; and thou Bethlehem , land of Judah , art in no wise least among the princes of Judah : For out of thee shall come forth a governor , which shall be shepherd of my people Israel (Revised Version). In this quotation from <330502>Micah 5:2 notice the following Variations from the Hebrew, and practically from the LXX.: (1) Land of Judah for Ephratah; an unimportant change in the terms of definition. (2) Art in no wise least for which art little to be ; a verbal contradiction probably, but also unimportant, as the thought of the context in Micah is of Bethlehems greatness. (3) Princes for thousands. This may be due (a) to a different pointing of the Hebrew, ypelua"B] for ypel]a"B] (cf. the rabbinic commentary, Metzud. Zion.), or (b) to understanding ypel]a"B] as families ( <070615>Judges 6:15; cf. Revised Version margin), and then concentrating the family in its head. (4) For out of thee shall come forth a governor, which shall be shepherd of my people Israel for out of thee shall one come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel. This is a paraphrase, with a paraphrastic addition from <100502>2 Samuel 5:2 (7:7), in order to distinctly identify the ruler with Messiah. Nothing is commoner in Jewish authors than the silent conjunction of quotations from separate contexts. In this case the thought of the shepherd in <330504>Micah 5:4 made the addition from Samuel the more easy. It must also be noticed that the

reference of the passage in Micah to Christ is fully borne out by Jewish writers. Though they generally explain the rest of the verse as referring to the long lapse of time from David himself, they understand the ruler to be Messiah. But it is not usual with Jewish interpreters to understand the reference to Bethlehem as implying the place of Messiahs own birth. They generally take it as referring to the home of David, Messiahs ancestor. And this is the more natural meaning of the prophecy. The quotation, however, from the Jerusalem Talmud already given on ver. 1, and the Targum of Jonathan on <013521>Genesis 35:21
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

(the tower of Edar the place whence King Messiah is about to be revealed in the end of the days), endorse the thoroughly Jewish character of the reply given to Herod (cf. also <430742>John 7:42). If it be asked why St. Matthew does not give an exact and verbal rendering of the Hebrew, the answer may be made that he probably gives the current form of its exposition. The high priests and scribes would have doubtless quoted it accurately in the process of weighing Micahs statement, but when, as here, they were only reproducing the result that they had arrived at, they would care for only the substance of the prophets teaching (cf. the paraphrastic rendering of the Targum). In the land of Judah ; Revised Version omits in ( Bhqlee<m gh~ jIou>da ) . Bethlehem-Judah would have presented no difficulty, for a town was often distinguished by the apposition of the name of the district in which it was situated; e.g. Ramoth- Gilead, Kedesh-Naphtali. It seems best to explain the gh~ as a mere expansion of Judah (cf. 1 Macc. 5:68, a]zwton gh~najllofulw~n , where probably the thought was Ashdod-Philistia). It is, however, possible that gh~ is here used in the sense of the town and its surrounding district, over which district, it is to be observed, Herod extended his massacre (verse 16) (Humphrey, in loc .). Ver. 7. Then Herod, when he had privily called the Wise Men . Secrecy was doubly necessary. He would not publicly commit himself to acknowledging the rights of the new King, and he would give no opportunity for others to warn the Childs parents of the dangerous interest that Herod was taking in him. Duplicity was very characteristic of Herod; cf. his assassination of Aristobulus the high priest (Josephus, Ant., 15:3. 3), and his alluring his son Antipater home to death (ibid., 17:5. 1). Inquired of them diligently ; learned of them carefully (Revised Version); lerned of hem bisili (Wickliffe); hjkri>bwsen par aujtw~n . The stress is not upon Herods careful questioning, but on the exact information that he obtained. What time the star appeared . Although this is not the literal translation, it may, perhaps, represent the sense of the original ( to<n cro>non tou~ fainome>nou ajste>rov ) , the participle characterizing the star in its most important relation its appearance, and the words being treated as a compound expression (cf.

<431209>John

12:9, 12). Herod supposed that the birth of the Babe was synchronous with the first appearance of the star. The translation, however, of the Revised Version margin, the time of the star that appeared, better suits the exact wording ( cro>non ,not kairo>n ; fainome>nou , not fane>ntov ) , the phrase thus including both the first appearance and also the period of continuance (cf. Grotius, non
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

initium, sed continuitas). But it is difficult to see What Herod would have learned from this latter particular. Some even think that the star was still visible (Plumptre; Weiss, Matthew), but in this case the joy of the Magi in ver. 10 is not satisfactorily explained. Ver. 8. And he sent them to Bethlehem . Thus answering their question (ver. 2). And said, Go and search diligently for the young Child; and search out carefully concerning , Revised Version; ejxeta>sate ajkribw~v peri> . Herod bade them make precise inquiry as to all particulars about the Child. The more details he could obtain, the more easily he could make away with him. And when ye have found him, bring me word again, that I may come and worship him also; the Revised Version rightly joins, I also I as well as you; I the king. It might well be at a secret conference with the Magi that Herod said this, for no Jew would have believed him. Worship ; ver. 2, note. Ver. 9. When they had heard the king . There is a slight contrast in the Greek, but they [ for their part ] having heard the King. They departed ; went their way (Revised Version). Took their journey ( ejporeu>qhsan ) . And lo, the star, which they saw in the East . They would, in accordance with Eastern custom, probably travel by night. Observe that the joy they felt at seeing the star (ver. 10) implies that it had not continued visible (ver. 7, note). They had fully used all means; now they receive fresh Divine guidance. In the East (ver. 2, note). Went before them . Continuously ( troh~gen ); taking them by the hand and drawing them on (Chrysostom). Not to show them the way to Bethlehem, for the road was easy, but to assure them of guidance to the Babe, over whose temporary home it stayed. The road to Bethlehem is, and from the nature of the valley must always have been, so nearly straight (until the last half- mile, when there is a sudden turn up the hill) that the star need have moved but slightly. Bethlehem itself is seen soon after passing Mar Elias, a monastery rather more than half-way from Jerusalem (Socins Baedeker, p. 242). Till it came and stood over where the young Child was . Does the true reading ( ejsta>qh ) suggest the unseen hand by which this star was itself guided and stationed ( <402711>Matthew 27:11)? or is it used with a kind of reflexive

force, indicating that it was by no chance that it stood still there took its stand (cf. staqei>v , <421811>Luke 18:11, 40; 19:8; <440214>Acts 2:14, et al. ; cf. also <660803>Revelation 8:3; 12:18)? Ver. 10. When ( and when , Revised Version) they saw the star, they rejoiced with exceeding great joy; they were marvelously glad
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

(Tyndale). Its reappearance was the pledge of the full answer to their search, the full reward of their toilsome journey. Contrast the indifference of the chosen people. Ver. 11. And when they were come into the house . For after the enrolment the caravanserai would not be so crowded ( <420207>Luke 2:7). But whether it was now the caravanserai or a private house, we have no evidence to show. They saw ( ei+don , with the uncials and most of the versions). The translators in this case followed the text of the Complutensian (1514) and of Colinaeus edition (1534), rejecting the false eu=ron of the Vulgate and the Received Text . The young Child with Mary his mother, and fell down, and worshipped him (ver. 2, note). In this latter clause Mary is not mentioned. And when they had opened . Neither the Authorized Version nor the Revised Version brings out the exact correlation of the six aorists in this verse. Their treasures (so the Revised Version); perhaps, more strictly, treasuries , coffers. There is the same ambiguity about treasure in old English (cf. <241013>Jeremiah 10:13; 51:16; Eeclus. 43:14) as in the Greek. They presented unto him gifts . Thus fulfilling in germ the predictions of offerings being made to Messiah and Messiahs people by the Gentile nations (Isaiah 60.; <370207>Haggai 2:7; <197210> Psalm 72:10). Presented ; offered (Revised Version). The verb used ( prosfe>rw ) seems to lay stress on the persons to whom and by whom the offering is made, the personal relation in which they stand to each other; ajnafe>rw (cf. Bishop Westcott, on <580727>Hebrews 7:27) and pari>sthmi on the destination and use of the offering ( <590221>James 2:21; <450613>Romans 6:13). Observe the three stages in this verse vision, submission, consecration. Gifts ; without which one does not approach an Eastern monarch (cf. <111002>1 Kings 10:2). Gold, and frankincense, and myrrh . Wealth and delights, the material and the aesthetic. Ver. 12. And being warned of God ( kai<crhmatisqe>ntev ; cf. Bishop Westcott, on <580805>Hebrews 8:5). And , not but; this is joined to the threefold and of ver. 11, and is the final example of Gods mercy and grace towards them, preserving them from probable death at Herods hands. In a dream ( <400120>Matthew 1:20, note). That they should not return to Herod,

they departed into their own country another way. Perhaps eastwards by Bet Sahur and Mar Saba and Jericho. Vers. 13 -15 . The deliverance of Jesus by flight into Egypt. Ver. 13. And (Revised Version, now ) when they were departed . The flight was not by their advice, and they were not even entrusted with the
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

secret. Behold, the angel of the Lord appeareth to Joseph in a dream ( <400120>Matthew 1:20, notes). The present tense ( fai>netai ) is here more vivid. Saying , Arise (ver. 14, note), and take the young Child and his mother, and flee into Egypt, and be thou there until I bring thee word ; Revised Version, I tell thee ( e[wv a}n ei]pw soi ). The rendering of the Authorized Version seems to be due to a desire to express the dependence of the messenger on him who sent him. For Herod ; though he spoke so fair to the Magi. Will seek . The full form ( me>llei zhtei~n ) hints that Herods action will be the result of no momentary emotion, but of premeditation. The young Child to destroy him . The final motive ( tou~ ajpole>sai ) of seeking him. Ver. 14. When he arose, he took ; Revised Version, and he arose and took. The ejgerqei>v here, as in ver. 13, precludes delay. The young Child and his mother by night, and departed into Egypt . As St. Paul in after years was able to connect himself with fellow-craftsmen, and thus maintain himself ( <441803>Acts 18:3), so might Joseph reasonably expect to be able to do in Egypt, and the more so since the connexion there between those who worked at the same trade seems to have been even closer than elsewhere, for in tile great synagogue at Alexandria they sat together, so that if a stranger came he could join himself to his fellow-craftsmen and, through their means, obtain his livelihood (Talm. Jeremiah, Suecah, 5:1, p. 55, d). Jewish reference to our Lords stay in Egypt are to be found in the blasphemous tables of his having brought thence his knowledge of magic (cf. Laible, in Nathanael, 1890, p. 79). Ver. 15. And was there until the death of Herod . The Revised Version rightly .joins this with the preceding, not with the following, clause. That it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying ( <400122>Matthew 1:22, notes), Out of Egypt have I called (Revised Version, did I call ) my Son ( <281101>Hosea 11:1, When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt). Observe here: (1) The quotation is not from the LXX. (Out of Egypt I summoned his

children), but from the Hebrew, which Aquila also follows. (2) The expression in Hosea is based on <020422>Exodus 4:22, Thus saith the Lord, Israel is my son, my firstborn; of. also Wisd. 18:13. They acknowledged this people to be the son of God ( wJmolo>ghsan Qeou~ uiJo<n lao<nei+nai ) .
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

(3) The quotation is, by the context, evidently adduced, not to prove the sonship of Jesus, but to enlarge upon the treatment that he received. The fundamental thought is that the experience of Messiah was parallel to the experience of the nation. (4) The application of the term my Son to Messiah is justified by Jewish thought. In <020422>Exodus 4:22 the nation was so called; in <190207>Psalm 2:7 the head of the nation, the theocratic king, received the same title; much more could the great theocratic King, the Messiah, be so spoken of. That, indeed, the name, the Son of God, was used as a title of Messiahship by the Jews lacks direct evidence (of. Stanton, The Jewish and the Christian Messiah, 1886, p. 288), but is surely to be deduced from <402663>Matthew 26:63 (16:16); of. also the application of <190207>Psalm 2:7 to Messiah in Talm. Bab., Succah, 52 a, in the late Midrash Tillim, in loc. , which traces the decree there spoken of through the Law ( <020422>Exodus 4:22), the prophets ( e.g. . <235213>Isaiah 52:13), and the Hagiographa ( e.g. <190207> Psalm 2:7; 110:1; for a paraphrase, cf. Edersheim, Life, etc., App. 9.). It is hardly too much to say that no Jew could consistently, either in the early days of the Church or now, find any difficulty in St. Matthews reference of the term my Son to Christ. (5) Seeing that St. Matthews reference of tile term my Son is justified by Jewish thought, and that the passage in Hosea is adduced to show that the experience of Messiah was parallel to that of the nation, there seems no real need to look for further reasons for the application. St. Matthew may hays held that Messiah was the Flower of Israel, so that what was predicated of Israel could be essentially explained of Messiah; he may have considered that Messiah was so organically connected with Israel that even when the nation was in Egypt Messiah was there also (cf. <580710>Hebrews 7:10; 11:26); he may have thought that the pro-incarnate Son of God was always with his Church, and therefore with it even in Egypt; but of none of these theories have we any hint. The application of <281101>Hosea 11:1 to the early life of Christ belongs, we do not doubt, to the very earliest stage of Jewish Christian thought, and to defend it by modem subtleties of interpretation (sound though they may be in other

connexions) seems quite out of place. Messiah was in some sense, as all Jews granted, the Son of God; Messiah, like the nation, went down into Egypt; what was predicated of the one was, clearly in this case, true of the other, and the prophets words received a fulfilment. The fulfilment was, indeed, what we should call a coincidence (of. ver. 23, note), but to the pious mind, and especially
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

to the pious mind of a .Jew, coincidences are not chances, they are signs of the Divine Governor (cf. Bishop Westcott, Hebr., p. 481: 1889). Vers. 16-18. The slaughter of the innocents. Ver. 16. Then Herod, when he saw that he was mocked ( o[ti ejnepai>cqh ) . The verb which in the New Testament occurs only in the synoptists, and always in the strict sense of mock ( e.g. <402019>Matthew 20:19; 27:29, 31, 41), represents Herods feelings, and perhaps his language, at his treatment by the Magi. It was more than deception; they had trifled with him. Of the Wise Men, was exceeding wroth, and sent forth, and slew all the children ; Revised Version, male children ( tou<v pai~dav ,not ta< te>kra ). That were in Bethlehem, and in all the coasts (Revised Version, borders ) thereof. Not merely the districts legally belonging to the city, but the neighbourhood generally. From two years old and under, according to the time which he had diligently inquired (ver. 7, note) of the Wise Men . Had he made further inquiries, he might have aroused suspicion, so he made sure of his prey by allowing a wide margin both in time and space. On Augustus being informed, says Macrobius [Saturn., 2:4], that among the boys under two years of age whom Herod ordered to be slain in Syria, his own son also lind been slain, It is better, said he, to be Herods pig ( u+n ) than his son ( uiJo<n ). Although Macrobius is a late writer [circ. 400]. and made the mistake of supposing that Herods son Antipater, who was put to death about the same time as the massacre of the innocents, had actually perished in that massacre, it is clear that the form in which he narrates the bon mot of Augustus points to some dim reminiscence of this cruel slaughter (Farrar, Life, etc., p. 34, illust. edit.; cf. also Ellicott, Lectures, p. 78). Farrar (and Edersheim accepts his calculation) reckons that not more than twenty children were killed. Thus failed the first attempt to destroy Christ,
<661204>

Revelation 12:4 (Nosgen).

Vers. 17, 18. Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by ( dia> ) Jeremy the prophet, saying, In Rama was there a voice heard, lamentation, and

weeping, and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children, and would not be comforted, because they are not ( <243115>Jeremiah 31:15, from the Hebrew). Notice: (1) As to details. (a) The order in the Revised Version. A voice was heard in Ramah is more literal; the stress is on the cry rather than on the place.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

(b) Lamentation and must be omitted, with the Revised Version, as a mere addition from the LXX. (c) And would not. The Revised Version, and she would not , seems to be an attempt to express the full term, kai< oujk h]qelen k.t.l. . (cf.
<013735>

Genesis 37:35).

(2) As to the quotation generally. St. Matthew applies Jeremiahs picture of Rachel, the mother of Joseph, i.e. of Ephraim (and also Manasseh), which was the typical part of the northern kingdom, weeping over the destruction of her children by the Assyrians, to the weeping of the mothers in Bethlehem. This application was the more easy because, as Rachels tomb was near Bethlehem ( <013519>Genesis 35:19; 48.7), she might be considered the figurative ancestress of the Bethlehe-mites as well as the physical ancestress of the Ephraimites. The fulfilment spoken of is thus not to be understood as implying that Jeremiah predicted the massacre at Bethlehem, but that in it his words received a new and deeper significance. It must, however, be added that, although Rachels tomb is placed at Bethlehem, both by the direct statement of the present text of Genesis and by tradition, which may be traced at least as far back as A . D . 333, and is accepted by Jews, Christians, and Mohammedans, there are serious doubts whether <091002>1 Samuel 10:2 does not definitely place it in the north of Benjamin, and whether <243115>Jeremiah 31:15 does not accept this latter view (cf. for this question Delitzsch, on Genesis, loc. cit. ) . In any case, St. Matthew adopts the statement of Genesis. Vers. 19-23. The return from Egypt and settlement in Nazareth. Ver. 19. But when Herod was dead . Does the repetition of the tenor of ver. 15 point to a different source? Behold, an angel (rightly; contrast
<400120>

Matthew 1:20, note) of the Lord appeareth in a dream to Joseph ( fai>netai kat o]nar , as in ver. 13). In both cases the stress is on the fact of the appearance, not on its mode. In Egypt. The evangelist will leave no room for doubt as to

where Joseph then was (cf. note at head of chapter). Ver. 20. Saying, Arise, and take the young Child and his mother (so far verbally equivalent to ver. 13). And go into the land. of Israel; any part of the holy and promised land ( <091319>1 Samuel 13:19; <261117>Ezekiel 11:17). For they are dead which sought the young Childs life . The plural is difficult, and is perhaps best explained as an adaptation of the historic parallel of <020419>Exodus 4:19.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

Ver. 21. And he arose, and took the young Child and his mother (so far verbally equivalent to ver. 14), and came into the land of Israel . Implicit and immediate obedience marking all he did. Ver. 22. But when he heard that Archelaus . Until his murder five days before Herods own death in the spring of A.U.C. 750, Antipater, Herods eldest son, might naturally have been regarded as the successor, though in fact Antipas had been named as such in the will. But after Antipaters death Herod altered his will; and appointing Antipas Tetrarch of Galilee and Peraea, and Philip Tetrarch of Gaulonitis, Traehonitis, and Paneas, he granted the kingdom to Archelaus. Further, even after Herods death, the succession was far from certain until the consent of Augustus had been obtained, and this, in fact, was jeopardized by Archelauss massacre of three thousand cf those who, on his accession, called for justice on the agents of the barbarities of the late reign. Eventually, however, Herods last arrangement was practically confirmed by Augustus, save that he expressly gave Archelaus, who had hastened to Rome, but half of his fathers dominion, and appointed him only ethnarch, promising to make him king if he governed that part virtuously (Josephus, Ant., 17:8. 1; 11. 4; cf. Bell. Jud., 1. 33. 8; 2:7. 3). Josephs fear of Archelaus quite corresponds to the character given of him by the Jewish ambassadors before Augustus. He seemed to be afraid lest he should not be deemed Herods own son; and so, without any delay, he immediately Jet the nation understand his meaning, i.e. by the slaughter of the three thousand malcontents above referred to (Josephus, Ant., 17:11.2). He was in A . D . 6 deposed for his cruelty, and banished to Vienne, in Gaul. Did reign ; Revised Version, was reigning ; an attempt to express the vivid present of the original, which recalls the very words he heard. After Augustuss decision, Archelaus could not legally have called himself basileu>v ,but the title, especially as implied in the verb, would have been customary in popular speech (cf. <401409>Matthew 14:9). But it is possible that the expression was used before Archelaus went to Rome, and at the time of his first grasp of power under Herods will. In Judaea . The Revised Version ( over Judaea , basileu>ei th~v jIoudai>av ) rightly implies not only that he lived in Judaea, but that, unlike his father, was not king of the whole of Palestine, but emphatically of Judaea. To

this Idumaea and Samaria were appendages. In the room of his father Herod . Had St. Matthew the same thought as the Jewish ambassadors above? He was afraid to go thither; and presumably he told God his fears. Notwithstanding (only de> ); Revised Version, and. Being warned of God (ver. 12, note). For he does
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

not leave his people in perplexity. In a dream . No angel is mentioned this time. He turned aside ; Revised Version, he withdrew ( ajnecw>rhsen ) . Into the parts of Galilee ; where Antipas was tetrarch. The form (cf.
<401521>

Matthew 15:21; 16:13) seems to imply removal from one spot to another before finally settling at Nazareth, and also the subordinate importance of the places visited, compared with the more populous towns. Ver. 23. And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth . En- Nasira , now of from five thousand to six thousand souls, in the hills on the northern edge of the Plain of Esdraelon, not mentioned in the Old Testament or by Josephus. Nazareth is a rose, and, like a rose, has the same rounded form, enclosed by mountains as the flower by its leaves (Quaresimus, in Stanley, Sinai and Palestine, p. 365). Observe the (:) in the Revised Version, showing that the following fulfilment is not to be considered as part of Josephs intention. Dwelt ; settled down after the exile life (cf <440704>Acts 7:4). That ( o[pwv ). The purpose lay in the Divine overruling of Josephs action, o]pwv with plhrwqh~| , <400817>Matthew 8:17 and 13:35 only. In each case it is used with reference to general statements, i.e. it marks a less close connection than that implied by i[na . It might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets. He shall be called (Revised Version, that he should be called ; o[ti klhqh>setai ; cf. also the Geneva) a Nazarene . The Revised Version expresses the fact that the quotation is not of words, but of substance, for although the recitative o[ti is found in St. Matthew ( <400723>Matthew 7:23; 9:18; 14:26; 27:43, 47) and even before verbal citations from Scripture after ge>graptai ( <400406>Matthew 4:6) and ajne>gnwete ( <402116>Matthew 21:16, contrast 42), yet it does not occur after the formula to< rJhqe>nk.t.l . By the prophets. Not in the prophets

( <441340>Acts 13:40), which might have preferred (yet cf. <580101>Hebrews 1:1) only to the book containing their writings, and then would not in itself have implied more than one passage there. The present phrase ( dia< tw~n profhtw~n ) suggests personality rather than writing, and implies either that two or more prophets were the agents by whom the words were spoken, or, better,

that in some way the whole company of the prophets (cf. Acts 3:25; <580101>Hebrews 1:1) spoke the message now summarized. In this way the .phrase will indicate that even if the following words are found in the utterances of only one prophet, they also represent a phase of teaching common to all. A Nazarene. Those interpretations which connect this with rzn ( nzr ) ,
<440325>

(1) in the sense of separated (Lightfoot, Hor. Hebr.),

<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

(a) generally (cf. <196907>Psalm 69:7); (b) specifically as Nazarite ( ryzn , Nazhrai~ov , so Tyndale to Rheims); or (2) in the sense of diadem ( rz,ne , Zu Cronberg [ trzn ] hat der Gekronte gewohnet, Bengel); are inadmissible in the light of the fact that, in Jewish writings, both Nazareth ( tr;x]n" , Neub., Geogr., p. 190) and Nazarene ( yrxwn ) are from rxn ( ntsr ) . Thus the reference to the prophets requires that they speak of Messiah by some term belonging to this root, and not to rzn ( nzr ). What this term is may be gathered from the true text of Talm. Bab., Sanh., 43a (cf. Levy, s.v. rxn , and for the passage in full, Rabbinowicz, Var. Leer.), where, after enumerating five disciples of Jesus the Nazarene ( yrxwnh wy ), among them Netzer, a summary is given of their trial and condemnation. Of Netzer it is said, They brought Netzer up for trial. He said to the judges, Shall Netzer be slain? It is written, A branch ( netzer , rxn ) out of his roots shall bear fruit ( <231101>Isaiah 11:1).They answered him, Yea, Netzer shall be slain. For it is written, But thou art cast forth away from thy sepulchre like an abominable branch ( netzer ,
<231419>

Isaiah 14:19). It does not now concern us to inquire which, if any, of the twelve disciples is here spoken of by the name of Netzer. But it is evident that the Jews (1) connected this name closely with Jesus the Nazarene just before mentioned, and (2) saw a connexion between it and the Branch of <231101>Isaiah 11:1. True that they rejected the disciples application of the passage, but they did not reject the identity of the expressions. The application which was made, even according to the Talmud, is fully expressed by the evangelist here. There, as we may see if we read between the lines, the disciple claimed for his Christianity that it corresponded to the promise of Isaiah; here the evangelist more definitely claims a correspondence between that promise and Jesus. He is not concerned with deeper points of similarity, though they could not fail to suggest themselves both to him and to his readers, but merely notices that the very dwelling-place of Jesus

answers to the promise of Messiah. Netzer he was to be; the Divine working brought it about that this, though in adjectival form, was his common appellation. Observe that
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

(1) to netzer in <231101>Isaiah 11:1 the word tsemah , corresponds in <242305> Jeremiah 23:5 and <380308>Zechariah 3:8; (2) the fulfilment consists, not in carrying out a definite statement to its logical issue in history, but in the existence of a strange correspondence which implies Divine foresight and arrangement. Why Joseph settled at Nazareth rather than at any other spot in Galilee, St. Matthew gives no hint. The reason is found in the fact recorded by St. Luke that Mary ( <420126>Luke 1:26) and Joseph ( <420204>Luke 2:4) had lived there before the Birth. It is true that St. Matthews account taken alone gives the impression that this was not the case, but the impression is not so strong as to warrant even the assertion that St. Matthew was ignorant of the earlier residence, much less that his account in fact contradicts St. Lukes. The mutual independence and the general trustworthiness of the two accounts of the Birth and Infancy is shown by the fact that in their less important details they cannot always be reconciled. (On our present difficulties in arranging the events recorded in <400102>Matthew 1:2 and <420102>Luke 1:2, cf. Ellicott, Lects., p. 70; Godet, Luke, transl., 1. pp. 153-156.)

HOMILETICS.
Vers. 1-12. The Wise Men from the East.

I. THEIR CIRCUMSTANCES.
1 . They were Gentiles. The first chapter represents the Lord Jesus as a Jew, the Son of David, the long-expected Messiah. The second chapter tells us that the Gentiles also have an interest in the new-born Saviour. He came to bear the sins of the world, to be the Saviour of the world; to be not only the Glory of his people Israel, but also a Light to lighten the Gentiles. Ancient prophecy had foretold that the Gentiles shall come to thy light, and kings to the brightness of thy rising. They were coming now, the firstfruits of the Gentile world

coming a long journey from the far East to seek the infant Saviour who had come from highest heaven to save their souls. They were the leaders of the long procession of Gentiles who, drawn by grace, have sought the Lord. What countless millions have followed them, not from the East only, but in mightier multitudes from the West, from the North, and from the South! Their coming, thus early, to the cradle of the Lord prefigured the gradual ingathering of that great host, that multitude which no man could number.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

2 . They were Magians. Like Daniel and his companions, they belonged to the learned, the sacerdotal, caste; they had been instructed in the wisdom of the East. Especially they had been engaged in the study of astronomy. Their learning had not degenerated into the magic, the pretensions to supernatural power, so common in their time. It was sanctified by a longing after God; it had elevated and refined their character. They were not like the Simon of Acts 8., or the Elymas of Acts 13. The name, Ma>goi , was common to them all; but Simon and Elymas were impostors, seeking their own selfish ends; their learning, such as it was, was degraded by falsehood and charlatanry; the Magians of St. Matthew were sincere seekers after God. They may possibly have heard something of ancient prophecy; the prophecies of Balaam, and more especially those of Daniel, may have been known in their country; they must have been familiar with the expectations of a coming King, a Deliverer, a Messiah, so generally diffused throughout the East. They were diligent observers of the stars; in the clear atmosphere of Mesopotamia or Persia they had watched the glorious march, the marvellous order, of the heavenly bodies. Astronomy, their favourite science, was blessed to their souls salvation it pointed the way to the Saviour. Science is the handmaid of religion, if it is pursued in the humble, teachable spirit which becomes seekers after truth. Philosophy, it has well been said, begins in wonder, and it ends in wonder. The wonders of this vast universe awaken thought and stimulate research, but every truth, pursued as far as man can reach, results in mystery. The wider, the more accurate, our knowledge, the deeper will be our consciousness of our own ignorance. That sense of ignorance, those insoluble mysteries, should lift up the heart to God. Reverence, humility, are the tempers which true learning should produce. They who in such a spirit follow Truth along her star-paved way will find that that way leads to God. The learned need a Saviour as much as the ignorant; the Magians must come to Christ as well as the shepherds. The best and holiest need him as much as the most sinful, the blessed virgin as much as the publican and the sinner. 3 . They were rich. They brought rich gifts gold, frankincense, and myrrh. The rich must come as well as the poor. They must bring their free- will offerings, giving largely, gladly, with a willing mind. Almsgiving is an important part of Christian duty, an element in Christian worship. The true disciple will learn of

the Lord who, though he was rich, yet for our sake became poor, the deep and holy lesson that it is more blessed to give than to receive. We must give, not the mere shreds and parings of our worldly substance, but in due proportion to our means. Of all that thou
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

shalt give me, Jacob said, when he had seen the vision of God in Bethel, the house of God, I will surely give the tenth unto thee. 4 . They came a long journey. From the far East, from Chaldea or from Persia. They shrank not from the toil, the danger, of the way. They believed the heavenly warning, they sought the Saviour. We must seek Christ in faith. God has called us; we must obey the calling. The way that leads to eternal life seems often long; it is always strait, narrow, steep. There is need of perseverance and self-denial; we must forget those things which are behind, pressing ever onwards to those things which are before. 5 . Their question. Where is he that is born King of the Jews? They had not the Scriptures, the Word of God, which is a lamp unto our feet, and a light unto our path. But they had seen the wondrous star; the voice of God speaking in their hearts told them its meaning. Then they arose, and went their way, seeking the King. We shall find the Christ if, like them, we are earnest seekers. Scripture, study, the promptings of our own heart, will lead us to him. For he is seeking us. He called the Wise Men from the East by the leading of a star; he calls us now by his Word, by his works, by his Spirit. We could not find him were it not that he first loved us, and sought us in his love. He was hidden from the eyes of sinful men in the unapproachable light which no man hath seen or can see. But he loved us; he draws us to himself by the attractive power of his constraining love. Yet we must seek him. It is he who seeketh that findeth; we must not sit still in spiritual idleness and take it for granted that all will be well. We must seek him as the Wise Men sought him, coming a long journey, offering our gifts, our hearts, our selves, our earthly goods. We must come asking, Where is he? Every one that seeketh findeth. Where is he that is born King of the Jews? It is a great question a question of deep meaning and very solemn interest. He is born King of the Jews King by birth, by Divine right; King not only of Israel after the flesh, but of the Israel of God, the Church of the Firstborn. We all owe him our allegiance, for he is our King, the King of the nations, King of kings and Lord of lords. Where is he? We must find him; for he is our Life, the Life of our souls. To know him is eternal life; we must seek until we find, seeking earnestly, like the Wise Men from the East, grudging no pains, no cost.

6 . What led them to the Christ ? The mysterious star. The brightest light that shone in the Gentile firmament was but as a star compared with the Sun of Righteousness. There were good men among the heathen men who in the darkness felt after the truth, if haply they might find it; who
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

showed the work of the law written in their hearts; men like Socrates, Plato, Epictetus, earnest seekers after God. Their knowledge was as a star, beautiful, but pale; very limited in range and power, glimmering in the darkness. Still, it was enough, we cannot doubt, for their salvation. Their conscience bore witness; if they followed its guidance it would bring them safe to their journeys end. That guiding star, conscience, the candle of the Lord within us, tells us of sin, of judgment, of salvation. It is set in our hearts to lead us to the Saviour. God grant that we may find him! 7 . The object of their coming. To worship him. The great blessedness promised to Gods saints is the beatific vision, the unveiled vision of God. I will, the Saviour said, that they may behold my glory which thou hast given me. That vision implies worship. Worship is the homage of the heart, the reverential submission of the whole being, adoration full of wondering awe, full of grateful love. It is the occupation of heaven: They rest not day and night, saying, Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come. We must learn to worship here; it is the training for the heavenly life. Worship is not merely prayer; it includes prayer, but it is more. It does not consist simply in asking for what we need to supply our own wants. It is unselfish; its. end is the glory of God. They who are learning here the true and heavenly worship are learning to approach God, to seek the presence of God, not only for their own deep necessities they must indeed seek him for that, but not for that only they seek his face for himself, because he is so great, so glorious, so holy, so gracious. He himself is the exceeding great Reward of his chosen. These Gentiles teach us Christians what so many of us forget, the duty of unselfish Worship simple, heartfelt adoration.

II. THEIR RECEPTION AT JERUSALEM.

1 . By Herod. They came to Jerusalem, the city of the great King, but they found not there the King whom they sought. Another king was reigning in Jerusalem, a stranger, an Edomite; a king in name, but a very slave of the evil one, now drawing near to the close of his wicked life, in that miserable old age which is the necessary result of a youth spent in the unbridled indulgence of sinful

appetites. (1) Herod was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him. The announcement of the Kings birth was not good news to Herod. He felt that that King must be the expected Messiah, the Christ; but he thought only of his own selfish aims, he feared for his crown. Strange that even in the immediate prospect of death, men should so cling to earthly things which must ass away so
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

very soon, and neglect the one thing needful. But it is commonly so; as a man lives, so, as a rule, he will die. The selfish and avaricious in life are selfish and avaricious still, even in the presence of death. He was troubled, and all Jerusalem. A strange awe came over people. The expectation of a Messiah was almost universal. Now, they heard, he was coming; and it may be their thoughts shaped themselves into the words of the prophet, Who may abide the day of his coming? and who shall stand when he appeareth? That awe soon passed away; the visit of the Magians was soon forgotten; the warning was lost. Jerusalem knew not the time of her visitation. The Lord came unto his own, and his own received him not. Men are troubled in spirit when death seems near, when the thought of the judgment is brought home to their souls. Alas] how often those solemn feelings bear no real fruit! Selfish fear is very different from conversion; fear passes away with the sense of danger; conversion is an abiding change. (2) He consults the priests and scribes. We see another strange inconsistency strange, but very common belief in the letter of Holy Scripture joined with practical unbelief. Herods religion is simply superstition; he has the Scriptures, he has the priests; he uses them as if they were heathen oracles, and priests of Jupiter or Apollo. Mere bibliolatry is little better than unbelief: the letter killeth. The Bible is precious exceedingly to the faithful: the Spirit giveth life; but to men like Herod, who make use of religion merely for political or selfish purposes, it is a savour of death unto death. (3) He sends the Wise Men to Bethlehem. He goes not there himself; he will come, he says. He bids others search diligently; he remains at home. So men put off the great work of life; they do not seek Christ now; they say they will do so; but the future recedes further and further; the end comes, they have not sought, and so they have not found. He will worship him, he says. He believes in a way, he half believes; it is, at least it may be, the expected King. But he is a traitor; in his intense wickedness he talks of worship while in his heart he is plotting death; he is ready to slay the King, the Messiah, if he can, rather than endanger the crown which he can wear so short a time. There is an awful warning in Herods selfish hypocrisy. Be true, it says to us, be true to your convictions. While you have the light, believe in the light, and walk in the light. Be true in yourselves,

true in your relations with God, true in your dealings with men. God is true; he sooth in secret. Hypocrisy is hateful in his sight; it is the death of the soul.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

2 . The chief priests and scribes. They knew the Scriptures; they could answer Herods question at once; they told him where the Christ should be born. But they were blind guides; they knew and did not. Their religion was a lifeless theology, a dead orthodoxy. They showed Others the way to Christ; they sought him not themselves. They taught the Gentile Magians; the disciples profited, the teachers were callous and unmoved. It is a sad thing when the preacher does not feel the saving power of the words which, by the grace of God, bring life to the listener. The deepest, the most accurate knowledge of the letter or Scripture is a very poor thing compared with that inner knowledge of the heart, which may be granted to the ignorant as well as to the learned; which leads learned and ignorant alike to him who is the only Saviour of the world, the Lord Jesus Christ. He was to be found in Bethlehem, in seclusion and poverty. Jerusalem was grand and rich; Bethlehem was small and poor. The priests showed the way, but went not; the Gentile Magians believed. The King was not to be found in Jerusalem, in its palaces, in its glorious temple. They sought him in simple faith in the little Bethlehem, and there they found the Governor, who should be the Shepherd of the Israel of God.

III. THEIR JOURNEY TO BETHLEHEM.

1 . They believed the Scriptures. They had not known the Scriptures; they were Gentiles. Now they heard them, and they doubted not. They had expected to find the King at Jerusalem; the Scriptures bade them seek him at Bethlehem; they at once obeyed. There is a lesson for us here. We should search the Scriptures, not, as many seem to do, to find our own opinions there, but in the humble, teachable spirit of the true disciple, who desires only to learn the truth of God, and, when he has learned it, strives with all his heart to do the will of God. 2 . The reward of their faith. The star appeared again; it went before them; it stood over where the young Child was. God will not leave us to grope our way in the darkness, when we are seeking him in faith. The kindly light of his gracious love will lead us through the encircling gloom. We may be far from home, like the Magians; but if, like them, we do not seek to choose our own path, but submit to be guided by his Word, the light will lead us on till, like them, we see a more

than angel-face, the loving face of the most holy Saviour. Earnest search is the condition of the heavenly guidance; the heavenly guidance is the reward of earnest search. They rejoiced to see the star; they recognized it as the star which had first raised their hopes when they saw it in the East. It came nearer now; its guidance
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

was more distinct, more certain; it stood over where the young Child was. The leading of Gods Holy Spirit, the intimations of his will, become clearer and more definite as the faithful Christian draws nearer to the end of his journey; the more readily they are obeyed, the plainer they become. The sons of God are led by his Spirit, led ever nearer to Christ. The fruit of the Spirit is joy; they rejoice with exceeding great joy who feel the workings of that good Spirit within them; they recognize his gentle whispers as the voice of God calling them to his great salvation. That joy is of all joys the holiest and the best, the most abiding; it is joy unspeakable and full of glory; it is the foretaste of the joy of heaven. 3 . Their thankfulness. They saw the young Child with Mary his mother. It was not as they had, perhaps, expected; there were no outward signs of royalty, no pomp, no guards, no courtiers; only a manger, or now, perhaps, some poor cottage; very different from the stately palace where they had left the proud, wicked Herod. But their faith was not shaken by these mean surroundings; they recognized the little Child as the King Messiah; they paid him the worship which they had come to render; they fell down and worshipped him him, we mark, not the virgin-mother. Worship was the end, the object, of their long journey. It is the end of ours; the heavenly worship before the throne is the high hope that brightens the Christian life. They made their offerings to the infant Christ. True worship involves offerings; they will give of their means who first have given their hearts; they freely give who have freely received; they who have found Christ count all earthly wealth as dross in comparison with the heavenly riches. They offered costly gifts gifts of mystic meaning. The frankincense was significant; it was offered to God in the services of the temple; offered to the holy Babe, it confessed his Divinity. Gold is offered to a king; the star had announced the approaching birth of the King of the Jews; the Magians recognized the infant Jesus as the promised King. Myrrh was used in preparing bodies for the grave. Nicodemus brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes ( <431939>John 19:39), and laid therein the sacred body of the Lord. It may be that the gift of myrrh prefigured the blessed death which was to close the earthly life of the holy Babe. 4 . Their departure. They were warned of God. Perhaps they had consulted him,

as the Greek word seems to imply. They could not trust Herod; the contrast between his dark character and the beautiful simplicity of the holy family at Bethlehem struck them, and awakened their suspicions. They feared the designs of Herod. They sought counsel of God; he provided for the safety of the holy Child; he warned them; they departed to their own
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

country. We know no more of them certainly; we cannot doubt that they were saints of God. Their pilgrimage was not in vain; they carried back the lessons they had learned, and died at the last in the faith of him whom they had worshipped. We may be sure of this sure that he who had begun the good work within their hearts would complete it. Their character is strikingly beautiful; simple faith, undoubting obedience, deep loving reverence, love that showed itself in costly offerings, these were the graces that shone forth in the first Gentiles to whom the Saviour of the world was manifested. LESSONS . 1 . Some read the Bible like Herod and the priests; they know all about Christ, they know not himself. Such knowledge sayeth not. 2 . Come to Christ yourselves, like the Wise Men; seek him, and you shall find; God guideth those who seek. 3 . They travelled far; you must persevere. They gave costly gifts; you must offer freely of your substance for the work of God. Vers. 13-23. The Lords infancy.

I. THE FLIGHT INTO EGYPT.

1 . The dream of Joseph. The visit of the Wise Men, with their adoring worship and their costly gifts, is followed by persecution and distress. The opening life of the Lord exhibits those vicissitudes which were to occur again and again in the history of his Church and in the lives of individual Christians. The bright sunshine of success and popularity is soon clouded by seeming failure, by perplexity and persecution. It is what we are to expect. The disciple is not above his Master, nor the servant above his Lord. But God cares for his own; his providence prepares them for the coming trials; in his hands we are safe. Why

do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing? The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the Lord, and against his Anointed. But he that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh; the Lord shall have them in derision. The humblest of his servants sometimes defeat the designs of the mightiest of his foes, for he is with them. Joseph saves the infant Jesus from the cruel hands of Herod. But it was under the Divine guidance. The angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream; God spoke to him by his
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

messenger in the visions of the night; God guided him in his difficulties, as he will guide us in ours, if we trust in him with the humble submission, with the undoubting obedience, of the holy Joseph. 2 . His journey. He obeyed at once; he took the young Child and his mother by night, and departed into Egypt. In Egypt, long ago, another Joseph had nourished his father and his brethren, the patriarchs, when the famine was sore in the land of Canaan; in Egypt, now, the little Babe was cherished who was to be the Bread of life, the Bread which came down from heaven and giveth life to the world. In Egypt the children of the patriarchs, Israel, the people of God, had lived long in exile and in bondage; in Egypt the heavenly Babe sojourned for a while, an outcast and a fugitive. God had called his son out of Egypt; he had said to Pharaoh, by the mouth of Moses, Israel is my son, even my firstborn: and I say unto thee, Let my son go ( <020422>Exodus 4:22, 23). When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt. But those words of Hosea were pregnant with a deeper meaning a meaning possibly not present to the mind of the prophet, but now unfolded by the Holy Ghost. God called his only begotten Son out of Egypt. God had a mighty work for him to do, and the scene of that work was to be, not Egypt, but the Holy Land. God sometimes seems to separate us from our work, to banish us from what seems to us our proper field of labour. We must trust him, as Joseph did; he will bring to pass in his own good time the purposes of his love and wisdom. 3 . The slaughter of the innocents. (1) The murderer. Herod reverences ancient prophecy, and seeks to slay the Lords Christ, of whom the prophets spake. He receives Holy Scripture as the Word of God, and tries to frustrate the counsels of the Most High. Strange and miserable inconsistency! His mind accepts the Divine authority of the Bible; his heart revolts in direct rebellion from the will of God. Like Balaam, he thinks that he, poor worm of the earth, can check the development of the purpose of God. Like Balaam, he puts his own selfish ends into conflict with the love of God. The infant King of the Jews may endanger his earthly throne; he will slay him if he can, though he believes him, or half believes him, to be appointed by God to be

the Ruler of his people Israel. Very awful wickedness; but yet differing only in degree from the guilt of those who, professing to believe in Christ, oppress his poor, or for their own selfish ends oppose the work and progress of his Church. The Bible is a very precious talent entrusted to us by God; but the knowledge
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

of his will must increase our condemnation a hundredfold if we set ourselves against it in our lives. Knowledge with obedience is very blessed; knowledge with disobedience incurs a fearful doom. (2) The victims. They were martyrs in deed, though not in will. They died for Christ, unconsciously indeed, but yet for him, to ensure his safety, that he might live to die for them, to save them, with all his people, through his most precious blood. We may be sure that their death was blessed; they died for Christ. They were taken from the evil to come; they died before their infant souls were stained by actual sin. The death of little children is a mystery. It looks like a waste of life; it seems as if there is an immense waste in the creation of God; such multitudes die before they come to maturity. But we live in an atmosphere of mystery; we can see only a very little way into the surrounding darkness. We walk by faith, not by sight. We must believe that he doeth all things well, and trust our babes to him who loved the little children, who took them up into his arms and blessed them. (3) The prophecy. The words of Jeremiah related to the wailings of the captives collected at Ramah on their way to Babylon. Rachel, their ancestress, buried near Bethlehem, hears their cries; she issues from her grave; her lamentations are heard in Ramah. Now the prophecy receives a second fulfilment; the bitter sorrow of the bereaved mothers moves the heart of the dead Rachel; again her voice is heard weeping with the weeping mothers. It is a touching illustration of the exceeding great anguish of those Bethlehem matrons. Rachel is represented as listening and joining in their mourning. The Lord Christ listens to us in our distress; he feels for us with all the depth of human tenderness, with all the strength of Divine love.

II. THE RETURN.

1 . Herod was dead. The wicked king, on whose conscience lay the death of so many sufferers, had now to meet death himself. His last days were passed in the extremest misery, sometimes in planning acts of cruelty, sometimes in fits of the deepest despair. His wealth and power could not save him from a frightful death.

There is no peace, saith my God, unto the wicked. His death teaches the solemn lesson, Envy thou not the oppressor. Wickedness, however gilded by rank and riches, must end in misery, probably in this world, certainly in the world to come. Herod was dead; the Lord Jesus was yet an Infant. The two, so utterly unlike, are mentioned here together. For a moment they almost crossed each others
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

path the old man and the little Babe; the Idumaean and the Son of David; the despot in all his barbaric splendour, and the Child who had been cradled in the manger; the mighty tyrant with his soldiers, and the helpless Infant with one only earthly protector; the one intensely wicked, guilty beyond the ordinary range of human guilt, the other Holiest of holies, gentle, loving, self-sacrificing beyond all that human heart can conceive. For a moment their paths almost met, and then they parted the one to die in torture, in misery of soul and body, thirsting for blood to the last moments of his evil life; the other to live a life most holy and most blessed, and at the last to lay down his life, a spotless Sacrifice, for the sins of the whole world. Herod was dead: who would envy the pomp and luxury of a life doomed to issue in such a death? They carried him to his tomb in royal majesty; the corpse lay on a bier of gold adorned with the costliest jewels. It seemed a ghastly mockery; that pomp could not follow him beyond the grave, it could not help the poor soul that was gone. 2 . The call. Again the angels voice aroused the sleeping Joseph; again he recognized the word of God, and obeyed, as was his wont, at once. He took the young Child and his mother. Mary had suffered much; she was highly favoured; but those who are nearest to God are often called to pass through great affliction. She was in exile, far from home and country; she must have been in great distress and anxiety for the safety of the precious Child. She had trusted herself to God before: Behold the handmaid of the Lord. Doubtless she trusted him always. He cared for her; he guided her. It is a comforting thought for anxious mothers. 3 . Nazareth. (1) Josephs fears. God had bidden him to go into the land of Israel; he went in faith and obedience. But he had our human weakness, our doubts and fears. Gods grace does not remove the infirmities of our human nature; it helps us to resist them. Joseph heard that Archelaus had succeeded his father in Judaea. His character was well known; he was like his father, cruel and suspicious. Joseph feared for the holy Child.

(2) His dream. Again (so the Greek word seems to suggest) he sought counsel of God; again, for the fourth time now, God answered him in a dream. We mark Josephs untiring watchfulness, his constant prayers, Gods gracious answers. Gods people must do their part; they must work and watch and pray. In all their difficulties they must come to God in prayer; he will guide and direct them, they may not doubt. But they must be, like Joseph, vigilant and careful; they must learn of One greater than
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

Joseph to watch and pray. They must try to live, as Joseph lived, in habitual intercourse with God. (3) His obedience. He might have wished to live at Bethlehem, where he and Mary were not known, where the holy Child was born; the city of David seemed the fit home for the Son of David. But there was reason to fear the tyranny of Archelaus. God guided him to Galilee; he returned to his old home at Nazareth. There the holy Child grew up to manhood. The first years of that wonderful life were spent in that little town, away from great cities; among the busy scenes of active life, in daily labour, in deep mysterious thought and constant prayer; in wanderings, perhaps, full of holy meditation, among those scenes of rare natural beauty, on those wooded hills with their wealth of bright flowers, with their fair, wide- reaching prospects. There he lived, a still, humble life, unknown to the great world; but, we may be sure, a life most beautiful and holy, a life which the angels of God watched with the intensest interest, with the deepest reverence. We may well be content to live quiet, commonplace lives, unknown and unregarded; such was the early life of Jesus Christ our Lord. But in those early years, we cannot doubt, much of his great work was wrought. By the obedience of One shall many be made righteous. During those long years of perfect purity and holy submission of will he obeyed the Law of God in our nature, as our Representative. He is our Wisdom and Righteousness and Sanctification; he is the Lord our Righteousness; his obedience is ours, if we abide in him. Out of those thirty years of silent obedience grew the three years of active work. Quiet persevering obedience in the ordinary duties of daily life is the best preparation for active work for God, and for the great emergencies which may from time to time occur in our lives. (4) The Nazarene. The prophets had spoken of the Messiah as the Branch ( Netser ) which should grow out of the roots of Jesse ( <231101>Isaiah 11:1). The name of Nazareth itself was Netser, the Branch. The prophets had also spoken of him as despised and rejected of men. He was the lowly Branch or Shrub, not the stately tree; he dwelt in Nazareth, which bore the same humble name, an unknown place, from which it was not thought that any good thing could come. The prophetic description was fulfilled; he was called the Nazarene; the same

name has been given in contempt to his disciples. He was lowly in heart; let us learn of him the precious grace of lowliness.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

LESSONS . 1 . God will bring to pass the purposes of his love; wicked men cannot overthrow them. In quietness and confidence shall be your strength. 2 . Trust the little ones to God; he cares for them. 3 . Be humble and gentle, like the holy Child.

HOMILIES BY W.F. ADENEY

Ver. 1. The days of Herod the king. This is more than a note of time. It cannot but strike us as a remarkable fact that Christ should have been born during the reign of the gloomy Idumaean ruler.

I. CHRIST COMES WHEN HE IS MOST NEEDED. Those were dark days

when Herod made his Saturnine temper the spirit of a nations government. His reign had been carried on with an external splendour and a vigorous attempt to please the Jews. But a heathen by nature, Herod was always suspected by the Jews in the midst of his pious Hebrew professions. Now, however, at the end of his life, his crimes had consumed what little good repute he had contrived to manufacture for himself. The nation was sick at heart, and the only solid hope left it was that cherished in the breast of the devout Jews, who, like Anna and Simeon, were waiting for the consolation of Israel. It was the chill and darkness that precede the dawn. Then Christ came. No earthly events could shape a Christ; for the earthly circumstances were most adverse. He did not come to reward merit; for merit was rare in those days. But the need was great, and it was simply the need of man that brought Christ into the world.

II. THERE IS ROOM FOR ANOTHER KING BESIDES THE EARTHLY

RULER. Herod was still reigning, and yet the Christ came to set up his kingdom.

The sovereign at Jerusalem naturally suspected the new-born King to be a rival to his throne. Most of the Jews would have shared his opinion if they had believed in Jesus, though they would have regarded the situation with very different feelings. But Christ did not come to sit on the throne of Herod, and we cannot think of him simply as the rightful Heir who will expel the insolent usurper. His kingdom is not of this world. Earthly monarchs rise and fall, and still he reigns. His is the
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

kingdom of heaven set up on earth. There is a reign of life which they that hold the sword of external government cannot hinder. They cannot restrain its glorious liberty, nor can they reform its evils. The world wants a King who can rule in the realm of ideas, who can sway hearts, who can conquer sin. Therefore the apostles were commissioned to make known another King, one Jesus ( <441707>Acts 17:7).

III. THE RULE OF CHRIST IS IN STRONG CONTRAST TO ITS

EXTERNAL SURROUNDINGS. Christ and Herod what a contrast the two names suggest! Yet they are the names of the two kings of the Jews of the same day. Force, selfishness, cruelty, characterize the degenerate visible rule. Truth, gentleness, love, mark the invisible spiritual rule. So it is always, though not necessarily in the same dramatic form. When we come to Christ and his kingdom we reach a higher level, we breathe purer air, we walk in the light. Then, though the days may be adverse and altogether unpropitious, we have reached what is above daily vexations, we have attained some of the peace of the eternity in which Christ lives. W.F.A. Vers. 1-12. The pilgrimage of the Magi. The way in which these men acted throws a flood of light on their characters.; at the same time, it opens up to us lessons of general application. The Magi are examples to us in their effort to find Christ, and in their conduct when they had found him.

I. THE SEARCH FOR CHRIST.

1 . Its origin. The Magi had seen his star in the East. This appearance was in accordance with the character of their own study and observation. God can use a variety of methods to bring us to Christ the science of the naturalist, the literature of the book-student, the work of the business man. He even used the astrology of the Magi.

2 . Its method. (1) The pursuit of knowledge already attained. These men knew their star, and to this they clung. We can best reach new truth by following the revelation already possessed by us. (2) A trust in heavenly guidance. The star in the physical heavens was regarded as a beacon from the spiritual heavens. In this case God permitted
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

it to serve as such a beacon. Thus the guidance was from God. We must lift up our eyes to the heavens if we would see the way to Christ. (3) A use of earthly means. At Jerusalem the Magi consulted Herod, and he took counsel of the rabbis. The fresh star in the heavens did not eclipse the light of ancient Hebrew prophecy. This still had its sphere in discovering Bethlehem. Divine revelation does not dispense with human study. New lights do not extinguish old truths. 3 . Its character. (1) An energetic search. The Magi set off on a long journey to find Christ. They did not wait for him to find them; they made it their business to discover him. Such a search deserves the reward of finding. Many do not know Christ because they will not take the trouble to seek him. (2) A persevering search. The Magi travelled far and pressed their suit, not resting till they had attained their end. The truly wise man will not abandon his search because of any amount of discouragements.

II. THE DISCOVERY OF CHRIST. At length the Babe was found. Every true
seeker after Christ will be rewarded by seeing him. Such a discovery is full of fruitful issues. 1 . Its blessedness. The Magi seem to have lost sight of the star during their anxious interviews with Herod at Jerusalem. When they were out in the country again the star reappeared; for the heavens are larger and brighter in the solitudes of nature than where they bend over the crowds of city life. It was a happy sight when the star reappeared, but only because this was the promise of the nearing sight of the infant Saviour. To reach him is to come to the hearts greatest joy. 2 . Its result. The Magi opened their rich stores and presented them to the Child. They set out with the object of worshipping him; this is the way in which they performed their intention. Their liturgy was an act of sacrifice. It is unworthy

only to seek Christ for the sake of the good we hope to obtain for ourselves. He is worthy of adoration, and we can best express our adoration by service and sacrifice. Some will not measure the gift. He whose heart is on fire with devotion to Christ will not ask with what minimum will his Lord be satisfied; he will love to give his best. The Christian can now give to the babe Jesus in giving to one of his little ones ( <401042>Matthew 10:42). W.F.A.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

Ver. 1. The Wise Men from the East. These Magi come to give their homage to Christ. Their own personal characters and circumstances enhance the value of their gifts.

I. HOMAGE FROM THE GENTILES. It is singular that St. Matthew, and not
St. Luke the evangelist of the Gentiles, gives us this narrative of Gentile faith and adoration. Thus we see that all parties among Christs true disciples recognized the great fact that the gospel was for the whole world. At the very commencement of Christs life this was seen. Yet still the greater part of the world is quite ignorant of his very Name. Here is a reason for greater missionaryactivity.

II. HOMAGE FROM A DISTANCE. These men had come from a far country.
They had made a long and tedious pilgrimage to Christ. None are so remote but that they may find Christ if they will truly seek him. Yet some who dwell in a Christian land are really further from Christ than some who are commonly reckoned as heathen. Surely Socrates was nearer to Christ than Caesar Borgia.

III. HOMAGE FROM ANTIQUITY. These Magi represented the ancient

Persian priesthood. But the old order of the Magi had been broken up, and many now took the name who were not in any recognized rank or office. Yet in the very degeneracy of the name it reminds us of its mysterious antiquity. The past looks forward to the future. Nothing in the past will satisfy the hearts of men. We may ransack antiquity, but we shall find there no substitute for Christ.

IV. THE HOMAGE OF SCIENCE. Evidently the Magi were astrologers. In old
times all that was known of astronomy was mixed up with astrology, and all that was known of chemistry was liable to be confused by ideas of alchemy and magic. Nevertheless, this does not mean that nothing was known of the true sciences. Here we see the science of the day bowing before Christ. Science cannot be contrary to Christ if he is the Truth, for it is but accurate and

systematized truth, and all truth must be harmonious. But neither science nor learning can ever be a substitute for Christ. The student cannot find the Bread of life in his books; and the man of science will not discover it in his laboratory. After all earthly attainments have been reached, the soul still needs Christ.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

V. THE HOMAGE OF WEALTH. Tradition has called the Wise Men kings.
Certainly they were men of substance, as they brought with them costly gifts. We think of Christ as the Friend of the poor, but we have no right to narrow our conception of his sympathy to any one class of society. He is equally the friend of the rich, when the rich accept his friendship e.g. Zacchaeus. Moreover, the rich need Christ as much as the poor. The rich, too, have the privilege of giving to him from their wealth. W.F.A. Vers. 16-18. The innocents. This is one of the most heartrending scenes in all history. The questions which it suggests are mysterious, and some of them quite unanswerable.

I. HERODS CRIME. People have said, This is impossible! But Herods

character, as painted by the secular historian, shows him to be gloomy and morose in his later days and capable of almost any cruelty. We execrate the enemies of Christ as monsters of wickedness. Herod and Judas are names that make us shudder, and we think of their owners as half-demons. Yet the wickedness of their crimes is not unapproached in our own day. The slow murder of young children by starvation and ill treatment, simply to escape the cost and trouble of keeping them, or because their death will be a source of gain to their guardians, is worse than Herods crime, because it is committed in cold blood and without the provocation of terror at the appearance of a dangerous rival which excited the jealous passions of the Idumaean prince. Then there is a slaughter of the souls of young children, which in the sight of God is more cruel and deadly than the killing of their bodies. When fair young lives are blighted and innocent characters stained by vicious examples, a fate worse than death has overtaken them, and those who exercised the baleful influence have a very heavy account to answer for.

II. THE CHILDRENS FATE. The death of young children is always a mystery.
We cannot understand why innocent infants should be permitted to suffer great

pain. It is a piteous sight to observe a baby-face drawn and pinched with agony. This is a very acute phase of the great mystery of suffering. It may be that greater evil in the future is thereby avoided. But even in that case the method of saving the children is terribly perplexing. Two points of light, however, emerge in the midst of the darkness of this mystery.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

1 . The suffering of the innocent is vicarious. These babes of Bethlehem have been regarded by a fond fancy as early martyrs for Christ. It was in his cause that they were slain. They died for Christ, as Christ afterwards died for men. 2 . The suffering of Christ s children is but the door to blessedness. The hope of a future life lights much of the gloom of this scene. Holman Hunts wonderful picture represents the murdered children just awakening to a new life as they are drawn after the infant Jesus with Mary and Joseph on their flight to Egypt like a trail of rosy clouds.

III. THE DIVINE DESTINY. The murder of the children at Bethlehem was
foreseen by God. It accomplished an ancient prophecy. This does not mean that God ordered it, but it shows that it could not frustrate Gods purposes purposes which were laid down in full knowledge of Herods attempt to nullify them. Therefore Herod was doomed to failure. His guilt was not the less because his crime was useless, but his power as an enemy of Christ is thus shown to be quite futile. Nothing can ultimately frustrate God s great designs. Christ has come to conquer, and he will win the victory in spite of his foes. The first Herod was not allowed to touch him when it was essential to Gods plan that he should live. The second Herod was permitted to have a hand in his death, but only when his time had come, and when the Divine destiny was fulfilled by means of. the crime of slaying Christ. W.F.A. Ver. 23. The Nazarene. We need not be troubled if we cannot find exact verbal precedents for the words here recorded. The idea that is suggested by the title Nazarene is apparent in more than one ancient prophecy; e.g. Isaiah 53.

I. CHRIST SHOWED HIS CONDESCENSION IN APPEARING AMONG

HUMBLE AND EVEN CONTEMPTIBLE SCENES. Nazareth was an obscure provincial town. Nathanael seems to have considered it to be a place with a bad

reputation ( <430146>John 1:46). Yet here our Lord spent the greater part of his life more than nine-tenths of it. Here he was brought up as a Boy, no doubt attending the elementary synagogue school, and later working at Josephs bench. Over the neighbouring hills he had roamed, and there he had learnt to love the flowers which abound in this highland retreat; there, too, he had been able to love his brother-men as he
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

saw them in their daily work and in the homely society of the little town. He was not kept, like Sakya Muni, from all sights of misery until his adult age forced them on his notice. Sorrow, suffering, sin, and death must often have come before his eyes. He never shrank into selfish isolation, but took his place with his suffering brethren, quite naturally, with lowliness and perfect simplicity, not a spark of pretentiousness ever leading them to expect that he would subsequently put forth the highest claims.

II. CHRIST WAS NOT THE CREATURE OF HIS CIRCUMSTANCES. His

genealogy showed that he was not a mere product of his ancestry; now his local surroundings make it apparent that he was not formed by the world about him. Had he been brought up at Jerusalem, or Athens, or Alexandria, or Rome, some might have tried to explain him as an expression of some great movement in the city of his early days. But no one can say that Nazareth could produce Christianity.

III. CHRIST WAS SEEN IN EXTERNAL LOWLINESS BEFORE HIS

DIVINE GREATNESS COULD BE PERCEIVED. He was known as the Nazarene before he was recognized as the Son of God. Many heard his local name who never saw his true greatness. This local name was even a hindrance to some; they could not believe in the Nazarene. Thus it was no great advantage to have known Christ after the flesh. His own people were slow to believe in him. Nazareth treated him badly, tried even to murder him by throwing him from a precipice of the rock-built town. It is possible now to blind ourselves to the true greatness and grace of Christ by looking too exclusively at his external life. We need to know Christ spiritually to enjoy the real blessedness of fellowship with him.

IV. CHRIST REDEEMED THE LOWEST THINGS THAT HE TOUCHED.

He has made the title Nazarene one of honour, as he has converted the shameful cross into a token regarded with adoring gratitude. Now we take pilgrimages to the once obscure Nazareth as to one of the most sacred spots on earth. If Christ enters a lonely life he uplifts it and sheds over it a new and unexpected beauty. To him nothing is common or unclean. As the Friend of

publicans and sinners, he does not only condescend to associate with degraded and neglected people; he lifts these people up to a new life. W.F.A.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

HOMILIES BY P.C. BARKER

Vers. 1-12. The happy misnomer of the Wise Men of the East. Once on a time our Saviour warned persons of far inferior privilege to our own that men would come from the east, and west, and north, and south, who should rise up in the judgment against them. The present passage of sacred history tells us most emphatically how men from the East did arrive very early, to upbraid, not in word, but with all the force of deed, though without any direct intention of doing so, those among whom, unexpected, unwelcomed visitors as they were, they arrived. The passage is crowded with suggestions of practical use; and, far from being novelties, they rather waken the echoes of our deepest heart and longpast experience and observation. From lesson and suggestion and reminders of our own experiences, to suggestion and lesson and reminders of our own experiences again, do the contents of this history lead us, some lying on the very surface and others deeper down. Let us observe, then, a notable instance of how

I. THOSE WHO LIVE FURTHEST OFF FROM ZION ARE OFTEN THE
EARLIEST AND MOST PUNCTUAL TO ARRIVE THERE. NO city, town, or village church or school but has witnessed this phenomenon times without number. The very type of all these lesser instances, yet instances so deeply significant of spiritual fact and history, is here. Very little can be said to be known about these Wise Men of the East, of whom the passage speaks. It is not difficult to make more than one account of them, which might hold together very well and seem sufficiently consistent to pass for truth. We are reading wellattested inspired history, or we might imagine we had come across the path of the fable and entered the region, not of Eastern wisdom, but of Eastern myth. But it is not so. There were these men called wise indeed, likelier to have been really good, who ventured on the long fanatic pilgrimage, and who are the first to knock at Jerusalems gates for the Messiah, at the temple doors yes, and at the weaker, the trembling doors of King Herods and many another heart of

Jerusalems regular inhabitants.

II. THE SPIRIT BLOWETH WHERE HE LISTETH. The impulse for these
pilgrims from the East cannot be set down to anything less than the Divine. There are some things that are certainly known and that help to throw light on the substance, if not on the form, of what is here recorded.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

It is true that there was a rumour prevalent over the whole of the East, and not concentrated even as much as it should have been in Judaea, that the time was approaching for the appearance of a great King, a King of a small people the Jews. He was to be One of whom great things should come to pass. There is nothing for a moment to hinder our supposing that the Wise Men had got hold of this vague rumour at least, and were working upon it. But were there not thousands of others into the hearing of whose ears the same things entered, yet to be powerless over their heart? By whom was this thing secretly brought to the Wise Men, and their ear received a little thereof? Perhaps in thoughts from the visions of the night, when deep sleep falleth on men. It was brought by the Author of all good counsel.

III. THERE IS A CERTAIN HARMONY IN THE WORK OF THAT SPIRIT

WHERE HIS PRESENCE REALLY IS, AND WHICH IS OFTEN VERY TRACEABLE. Perhaps we cannot say why the Spirit moved so remarkably those Wise Men of the East. It helps sustain our persuasion that he was the prime Mover when we observe the special guidance given to them. They were almost for certain Chaldeans, or Persians, or Arabians. Their very natural way of allusion to the star as his star receives accordingly all the easier explanation. They studied astrology, and thought divinely of their study. They were accustomed, in the course of the stars, to inquire for and investigate, as they thought, the course of human events. It was an ancient opinion, and one very widely spread, that great events on earth were portended often by corresponding appearances in the heavens. This need not be called a merely heathen fiction. It has been so, incontestably, at times and on occasions most solemn. Was it not so, above all, at the Crucifixion? and again on occasion of the destruction of Jerusalem? And if we were to ask whether it were altogether likely that as such things have nevertheless very often been turned to the purposes of superstition, God would have used a star by which to guide these men, and have so seemed to encourage an unreal science , however real at times the fact might be, we may venture to reply that it is very conceivable, very possible. Because what God looks at is not knowledge, but honesty. What he abhors is not human ignorance, but human dishonesty. There is to-day plenty of honest superstition in Chaldea, Persia, Arabia, India, China; while, alas! it is perhaps equally true that the pure

eye of God surveys a far larger total of dishonest superstition of the Worst character in every country of enlightened Europe, in every county of noonday England. Gods Spirit may often condescend to graft the
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

sweetest, kindest of his light on very blear-eyed intellectual vision, so that the moral vision be to its possibilities single. And as true, at all events, as whatever else in this wonderful narration, is this that from afar to Jerusalem, and from Jerusalem to over where the young Child was , a star was the divinely given guide to the pilgrims. The Spirit that gave the impulse to good hearts used the method that very imperfect minds would follow and be able to appreciate while they followed it. Nor did the kind, the faithful Spirit desert the work which he had begun.

IV. THE EARNESTNESS AND SINCERITY OF THE EARNEST AND

SINCERE WILL OFTEN IN AN UNPREMEDITATED AND WONDERFUL WAY, CUTTING ACROSS THE PATHS AND VERY HIGH WAYS OF THE WORLD, SERVE TO STARTLE THAT WORLD AND INSPIRE IN IT THE DEEPEST ALARM. It was certainly so now (vers. 3-8). The simple journey and simple inquiries of these men of love, whose steps were worship, lips peace, and hands adoring gifts, excite unparalleled commotion in the heart of the chiefest man of Jerusalem, and throughout the whole city. This is partly the very nature of truth, of whatever sort. It carries about with it a holy subtlety. And it is partly the gift of Gods providence. And it is partly just one chosen method, in and of itself, of Gods carrying on his work and reaching his ends, not by the power of might, but by that of goodness and simplicity. This excitement and commotion show at fewest six results here. First , in the fear wrought in King Herod and many others in Jerusalem. Secondly , in the ensuing summoning of the council. Thirdly , in the necessity entailed of searching the Scriptures. Fourthly , in the kings consulting of those Eastern pilgrims and forwarding them on their journey. Fifthly , in his committing himself to be beholden to them for what he considered vital information. And, sixthly , in clenching all by a profession of lying hypocrisy, the firstborn of his hearts stricken cowardice, when Herod lets out of his lips the words, that I also may come and worship him. The one inquiry of the Wise Men was like a six-edged blade, or a sixbladed knife, for the work it did.

V. THE FINEST QUALITY OF FAITH, THE MOST PERSISTENT HOPE,

AND ENERGY THE MOST ACTIVE AND ENTHUSIASTIC, HAVE BEEN FOUND TO COME OF THE KEENEST LONGING. It is astounding to observe the testimony which history bears to the amount of force of mind and force of achievement and triumph of every degree that follow strong longing, keenness of desire, impassioned wish. When these are, therefore, noble in sort and spiritual in their ends, earth has no grander
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

heroisms to admire. So Jacob won the morning victory after the night-long wrestling against all the grandeur of the Man who would not tell his name, but who showed his own prerogative when he blessed Jacob ( <013224>Genesis 32:24-30). So the Syro-phcenician woman won the victory in argument and in fact against the condescending, the merciful Jesus himself. And what have we here? Amid mens even superstitious inquirings of the heavens, upon such as do so inquire with honesty , with good motive, with intense anxiety, and for want of better opportunities of knowledge, a star of veritable meaning and calm brilliance may rise. It is in Gods sight a better thing to see men inquiring m some mistaken manner than not at all. These were men longing, inquiring, and, at great pains and outlay, seeking for the true King of men, the one Saviour of the world. The notion which they had. of that King and Saviour must needs have been very inadequate. It stood ticklish too, resting on the thin soil of dim tradition, standing on the slender footing of vague rumour. But because the footing of such knowledge, faith, and hope as they had was so slender, a little scanty soil on the side of the rocks the only apparent nutriment (as you may so often see in Alpine heights to wonders own perfection, with the splendid pines of the precipice), therefore did this good plant shoot down its roots with keener appetite, and clave to the rock itself. Granted that these men were heathen, and superstitious heathen; that with minds in large measure darkened, and with hearts undelivered into the freedom of the newest truth, they worshipped the host of heaven, the sun and moon and stars, and beholding the sun when it shined and the moon walking in its chaste brightness, their heart was secretly enticed, as Job describes the scene, and their mouth kissed their hand; that they belonged to the very company of star-gazers, astrologers, and monthly prognosticators, whose weakness to save God had himself challenged, and of whose ways, as so utterly heathenish, God had at least warned his own people by the mouth of Jeremiah, saying, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of the heavens; for it is the heathen who are dismayed at them the customs of the people are vain be not afraid of them, for they cannot do evil, neither also is it in them to do good; let all this be granted, yet nevertheless let us not despise what, manifestly, God did not despise the gropings of those in darkness, who longed for light, and inquired for it and travelled far to seek and to find it. Let us not despise the infant often falling and spreading trouble and

consternation all around, but who is most sincerely striving to walk uprightly. We have but to centre attention on this that through intense longing, with little to inform or to encourage it, they were inquiring and seeking, though they
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

inquired not with the right instruments nor sought in the most chosen fashion. What symptoms these of better things to come! of highest life not expired, and of a tremendous advance for the better, for that life beyond the grave! The conduct of these Wise Men of the East was counted worthy to find a place, long as time should last, on the page of the New Testament. Persist in seeking, and the Lord will rise on you. He will send enlargement of heart, growth of intelligent earnestness, and the persuasion that, guided by him first, you shall find yourself at last guided safely to him.

VI. A TRUE FAITH IS A SIMPLE DEVOTION. When the Wise Men had
found the young Child and his mother, they fell down and worshipped him; they opened their treasures, and presented their gifts to the Child gold and frankincense and myrrh. And with this they are content. They do not , emphatically not , worship the mother, nor present to her gifts. They have longed, have sought, have found, what kings and prophets of ages and centuries had desired, and in vain and they have found. A Divine contentment takes possession of them, and, still under the gracious guidance which had led them hitherto, they depart into their own country another way, who can doubt, not merely gladder men, but gladder with good reason, holier men? They have found the right worship, and their hearts have worshipped. Misnomer for them in a hundred aspects is their title of Wise Men, yet in one aspect so true as to counterbalance all the rest; for no wisdom equals the wisdom of simple, fervent, seeking goodness. B. Vers. 13, 19, 22. The providence that befriended the earliest life of Jesus. Three times in this chapter, as well as once in the preceding ( <400120>Matthew 1:20), do we thus read of the intervention of particular Divine directions given to Joseph in the interest of the infant Jesus. The grand head under which events of this kind must seek and find their classification is that of providence. The next greatest fact to creation is providence, without which creation itself would soon have proved a still-born thing, or some monstrosity. The objections that have

been sometimes felt, sometimes urged, against particular providences, do but betoken a feeble hold upon the real nature of providence. They incontestably lie in part material , and must be granted to be in somewhat closer relationship, at all events, than the interpositions called miracles and the general course of the socalled laws of nature. The very same hand that ministers the one ministers and rules the other in both instances. As surely as a thousand fall at our side,
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

and ten thousand at our right hand, seen , more than those numbers fall unseen also. As surely as we owe it to Gods goodness that we are saved from the comparatively few dangers we see and are cognizant of, we owe it to that goodness that we are saved from an immensely larger number unseen, undreamt of. What appears to us as the extraordinary interventions of Divine goodness and mercy are in no wise so extraordinary as respects the quality of the goodness and mercy, as in the fact that the whole matter of them lies, for some reason or other, disclosed and patent before our eyes. Notice, therefore, that

I. THE NECESSITIES OF HUMAN LIFE, IN VIEW OF ITS WEAKNESS

AND ITS NO FORESIGHT, ARE SUCH AS TO REQUIRE THE CONTINUAL MINISTRY OF DIVINE PROVIDENCE.

II. THE ADVANTAGE OF HUMAN LIFE IS INFINITELY CONSULTED IN

THE INTERVENTION OF THAT PROVIDENCE IN SUCH SHAPE AND MANNER AS SHALL MAKE IT STRIKINGLY APPARENT.

III. THOUGH SOME DIVINITY UNMISTAKABLY HEDGED IN THIS

WONDERFUL, IMPERILLED, GLORIOUS LIFE OF JESUS, YET, AT PRESENT AT ALL EVENTS, NO SPECIAL DIVINITY HEDGED IT IN. NO mark was placed on Jesus to designate him as the Favourite of God and of angels. Neither his Person nor his head only were really enveloped in a halo. He is befriended by providence, and faithfully befriended, but (1) only to the extent of his need, and (2) only in the same kind of way as innumerable others. His earthly parents must take all care, all precautions, all toilsome journeys, all vexatious home-leaving and country-leaving, if he is to be safe.

IV. DEEP INDICATIONS LIE IN ALL THIS OF THE MOST REAL

HUMANITY OF JESUS, AND OF HIS UNFEIGNED, OBEDIENT TAKING OF HUMAN NATURE AND HUMAN LOT. B.

Vers. 16-18. A notable instance of the vicarious in the human lot and in suffering. The great desirableness of reading Scripture and nature alike , observant of the facts of each, refusing to disguise the facts of either, attentively
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

following them as far as may be possible, and, if this be not far enough to conduct to the vindication of the facts themselves, reverently storing them, as the things that await explanation. Therefore

I. THE ATTENTION TO THE FACT THAT THE PRESENT SAVING FROM

DANGER OF THIS ONE LIFE, THE LIFE OF JESUS, WAS, IN LITERAL TRUTH, THE INVOLVING IN DESTRUCTION A LARGE NUMBER OF OTHER LIVES INNOCENT AS THE LIGHT, AND THE CAUSING OF INFINITE GRIEF AND WAILING TO MANY, MANY MOTHERS.

II. ALLOW FULLY THE FACT THAT GOD KNEW THIS, FOREKNEW IT,
AND PERMITTED IT.

III. RECALL THE FACT THAT THE ACT OF GOD IN THIS MATTER
CAME FIRST; THAT IT WAS IN ITSELF A RIGHT ACT, NAY, WAS THE RIGHT THING TO DO UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES PRESENT; WHILE HERODS PASSION AND MOST CRIMINAL DEED CAME AFTERWARD, SECOND IN THE SERIES, AND WERE INTRINSICALLY AND IN EVERY WAY UNJUSTIFIABLE.

IV. SHOW THAT ALL WHICH IS HERE RECORDED AS TAKING PLACE

AMOUNTS TO A VERY VIVID DEED-PAINTING OF VERY, VERY MUCH WITH WHICH WE ALL ARE BUT TOO FAMILIAR IN HUMAN LIFE. BY THOSE WHO CANNOT FORESEE, FOREKNOW, THE RIGHT AND THE GOOD ARE TO BE DONE, MUST AND SHALL BE DONE; AND THE RESPONSIBILITY OF CONSEQUENCES RESTS ELSEWHERE, WHEREVER THAT ELSEWHERE MAY BE.

V. POINT OUT THE SLIGHT CLUE THAT THIS PASSAGE AFFORDS TO

THE PROBABILITY OF A COMING VINDICATION OF THE BITTEREST VICARIOUS SUFFERING, THAT SHOULD SATISFY ALL, AND BE ACQUIESCED IN NOT LEAST BY THE SUFFERERS THEMSELVES. B.

<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

HOMILIES BY MARCUS DODS

Vers. 1-23. Childhood of Jesus.

I. HEROD AND JESUS. The king and the Babe; earthly might and spiritual
power. This contrast comes continually in view throughout the life of Christ, but never more strikingly than here. Depict the apparent helplessness of the young Child when confronted with the relentless and crafty hostility of Herod. The restless, suspicious jealousy of the old king, and the guileless, unconscious innocence of the Child. The selfish cruelty of the despot, and his ever-increasing misery, contrast with the self-sacrificing love and the calm peace of the spiritual King. The results of Herods reign, and the results of Christs reign. And yet how difficult to see the harvest in the seed! how difficult to discern between apparent and real glory! and how hard, even when we have some understanding of the difference, to choose for ourselves the glory which is attained by self-sacrifice and which makes no appeal to worldly ambition!

II. HEROD AND THE MAGI.

1 . Two classes of inquirers after Christ the well-intentioned, who seek him that they may do him homage; the evilly disposed, who strive to acquaint themselves sufficiently with his history to direct their assaults upon him. Two classes of critics of the Gospels the malevolent and the divinely led; the jealous and the frankly admiring; the destructive and the reverent. Christ excites curiosity and inquiry in all. His life stirs ceaseless controversy. Two currents-of hope and of hatred set towards him without intermission. He is the great Test of men, set for the fall and rising again of many. By their thoughts of him, their judgments passed upon him, their bearing towards him, men reveal their own nature. By their conduct towards Christ, their acceptance or refusal of him, men show whether their tastes are spiritual or earthly. 2 . Means by which inquirers are led. The astrology of these Magi was probably

not sound from the point of view of science; indeed, it is almost impossible for us even to understand their calculations regarding the star. But God used their ideas, fanciful, mistaken, or partly well grounded, to lead them to the truth. Instead of making tirades against the imperfect, he speaks to us in the language we understand, even if it express his meaning very imperfectly, and guides us thereby to the perfect truth. Just as he used
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

astrology to lead the world to astronomy, and alchemy to conduct it to chemistry, and as the revival of learning preceded the Reformation, so he used the knowledge of these men, which was half falsehood and superstition, to lead them to the Light of the world (Stalkers Life of Christ, p. 16). Where a true heart is earnestly longing for light, it is dealt with according to its capacity, and led by that which it will attend to. Notice might here be directed to the appearance of this law in the method of revelation the law of accommodation, which requires that regard should be had to the condition of those to whom a revelation is to be made. An American writer alludes to it in the following terms: The faults of the Old Testament are, as Herder says, the faults of the pupil, not of the teacher. They are the necessary incidents of a course of moral education; they are the unavoidable limitations of a partial and progressive revelation. If God chooses to enter upon an historic course of revelation, then that revelation must be accommodated to the necessities, and limited by the capacities, mental and moral, of each successive age. Otherwise revelation would be a wild, destructive power; a flood, sweeping everything away, and not the river of life. We cannot suppose that the Almighty can pour the Mississippi river into the banks of a mountain brook. He can begin, however, with the springs and the brooks, and make in time the broad Mississippi river.

III. HOMAGE OF THE MAGI. They are Gentiles and sages; they are aliens,
and belong to a school of experts in science; but they use their knowledge to glorify Jesus. They offer gifts symbolic of his royalty, and they themselves represent the attraction felt by all races towards the Christ. This King has blessings for all; and from the first he is claimed by those afar off.

IV. RETIREMENT IN EGYPT. The flight into Egypt was no mere expedient
of rescue, but is, on the contrary, a moulding factor of continuous influence in Christs life, giving to the subsequent stream of his fortunes a quite novel character and direction (W. G. Elmslie, in the Expositor , 6:401). It formed the necessary break between the miraculous birth, with its accompaniment of homage, and the quiet boyhood and youth, in which Jesus could grow up as other boys and youths did. After this flight we hear no more of angelic announcements, prophetic songs, signs in the heavens, or the homage of mysterious strangers; but

the life of the Boy falls into the ordinary course, and runs on unnoticed and unknown. Had it not been so, he could not have shared the ordinary human lot. Had he still and throughout been recognized as superhuman, the object of his
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

life would, so far, have been rendered impracticable. But the danger to which he was exposed by Herods jealousy, the warning which his parents thus received, and the obscurity in which they consequently kept their great Charge, secured the conditions necessary for our Lord becoming in all points like his brethren. D.

HOMILIES BY J.A. MACDONALD

Vers. 1-10. The star. Luke mentions the occurrence of a grand celestial illumination celebrating the nativity of Jesus, which was witnessed by Jewish shepherds, Matthew here records another heavenly sign, discerned by Gentile scientists. Such phenomena severally seen by Jew and Gentile, by peasants and by scholars, by persons in humble station and by those of wealth and standing authenticated this, viz. that the great event so celebrated concerns all sorts and conditions of men. We have here especially to consider the star which denoted Christ (see <662216>Revelation 22:16), whether viewed as a portent, a disturber, or a guide.

I. AS A PORTENT.
1 . A star is the emblem of a prince. (1) So the sign was interpreted by the Magi. Where is he that is born King of the Jews? for we have seen his star his emblem. Herod could not be credited with refined spiritual discernment, yet even he accepted at once the justness of their inference. (2) The Star out of Jacob is, in Balaams parable, explained to be a Sceptre, or King, destined to rise out of Israel ( <042417>Numbers 24:17). The ambitious monarch of Babylon would exalt his throne above the stars of God, or reigning kings; so would he be Lucifer, son of the morning, brightest among the stars or kings ( <231404>Isaiah 14:4, 12, 13). And the overthrow of monarchies is

described as the falling of stars from the (political) heavens ( <233404>Isaiah 34:4; <290315>Joel 3:15, 16; <402429>Matthew 24:29; <660612> Revelation 6:12-17). (3) The propriety of the symbol may be seen in the elements of (a) elevation; (b) conspicuousness;
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

(c) splendour; (d) rule, or influence over the earth (see <010114>Genesis 1:14-19). 2 . This star indicated an extraordinary Prince. (1) It was not an object seen only in description in a treatise on symbols. It was not a commonplace phenomenon. (2) It was an unusual apparition. It was not a fixed star; for it moved. Not a recognized planet; it was too near the earth. Not an ordinary electrical meteor; it blazed too steadily. Then, as a supernatural star, it betokened a supernatural Prince. 3 . It denoted the Christ of God. (1) The time was ripe for the advent of Messiah. (a) The sceptre, tribe rod, or tribal magistracy, was visibly departing from Judah ( <014910>Genesis 49:10). (b) The family of David was reduced to a humble condition, and all but extinct (cf. <230715>Isaiah 7:15 with <400304>Matthew 3:4; see also <235302>Isaiah 53:2). (c) Daniels weeks were fast running out ( <270924>Daniel 9:24). (2) Hence the prevalent expectation: (a) In Israel (see <402405>Matthew 24:5; <420315>Luke 3:15; 19:11). (b) Amongst the nations. This is testified by Suetonius, Tacitus, Cicero; also in sundry Oriental traditions. (3) The Magi seem to have shared in this expectation. They were generally familiar with Hebrew traditions. They appear to have been particularly acquainted with Balaams prophecy. Possibly the son of Beor had been one of their predecessors one of the ancient Magi of their own country.

(4) His star; the star peculiar to him. Evidently so, for no other prince sustains a miraculous character. The false Christ in the time of Adrian took the name of Barchochab , the son of a star. Note: The Wise Men profited by discerning the signs of their times. The neglect of prophetic study is the reverse of creditable to Christians (see <401603>Matthew 16:3; <610119>2 Peter 1:19- 21; <660103>Revelation 1:3).

II. AS A DISTURBER.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

1 . It troubled Herod. (1) By showing the advent of One whom he thought to be his political rival, who might deprive him of his throne. Jesus was born King of the Jews; Herod was an Idumaean usurper. He was too carnal to discern that the heavenly star betokened a heavenly kingdom. Jesus had no design upon his paltry seat. Note: Christ retributively rebukes the wicked through their own disordered imaginations. The most general enmities and oppositions to good. arise from mistakes (Bishop Hall). (2) Herods trouble stirred up the devil in his nature. He instantly took the resolution to rid himself of his rival. Note: Sin would murder any virtue that opposed its ambition. Virtues are representatives of Christ, who is the Impersonation of all virtues in their perfection. (3) Herod carried out his resolution with exquisite hypocrisy. Note: The most frightful wickedness is that concealed under the mask of piety. Sharpers join Churches and seek Church office to use the influence so acquired to fleece the simple and confiding. A Herod may even deceive wise men; he cannot cheat God. 2 . Jerusalem was troubled. (1) Herods courtiers were concerned for their places as their master was for his throne. Only the unscrupulous could aid the tyranny of such a ruler. In the kingdom of Messiah persons of that type could have no place. Note: What trouble will be amongst those who have the spirit of the courtier when the great King comes to the judgment! (2) But why should the citizens be troubled? They were troubled with Herod, aware of the moods of the tyrant, and dreading some tragedy. He had murdered the brother and grandfather of his wife; he had murdered Mariamne, his wife, and her mother Alexandra; he had despatched two of his own sons, etc. The slaughter of the innocents which followed justified such an apprehension. The tyrant was shown up when he had collected the principal Jews, and had them

shut up in the circus at Jericho, intending them all to be slain at his death, that a general mourning might be secured. We should bless God for our civil and religious liberties. (3) In Jerusalem there were those who waited for the Consolation of Israel ( <420225>Luke 2:25, 38). To these the news of the advent of Messiah would bring joy. He is not the trouble but the peace of the righteous. But
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

how few were they? How few now, even in the Church, are looking for the (second) appearing of Christ? (4) The majority of the citizens would be troubled because of their moral unfitness for the kingdom. The wicked ever have been, and still are, troubled at the thought of the fulfilment of Scripture. How many Christian professors would be fearfully troubled did those signs now appear in the heavens which are to presage the great day of judgment ( <402429>Matthew 24:29, 30)!

III. AS A GUIDE.
1 . By it the Magi came to Jerusalem. (1) We do not affirm that it moved before them in the heavens to point their way to Jerusalem. This does not appear to have been the case. But the appearance of the star in the East set them upon trains of thought which determined them to go to Jerusalem as the place most likely in which to get information concerning the King of the Jews. God does not work miracles to supersede the uses of reason. (2) The Magi were apprized as to the event of the Nativity; now they desired to know its place. The more we know of Christ the more we want to know. The Magi supremely desired to find him. With knowledge concerning Christ we should never be satisfied until it leads us to himself. Has the Day-star arisen in your hearts ! (3) In Jerusalem they got instruction from the Scriptures. The Sanhedrin (see Bloomfield, in loc .), convened at the instance of Herod, turn up the Prophet Micah, who makes Bethlehem of Judah the favoured place ( <330502>Micah 5:2). Thus, by the highest authority amongst the Jews was this most important public testimony borne, viz. That Jesus is the Christ. And this, too, through the instrumentality of a tyrant who had no such design. So God makes the wrath of man to praise him. So does he make the selfishness of the wicked subserve his own benign purposes.

2 . By it they were guided to Christ. (1) Now the Magi are on their way to Bethlehem. What for? To find in a somewhat populous city the right Babe. They journeyed in faith, trusting that he who had hitherto prospered their way would guide them to the end. Note: Those who follow up the leadings of providence will never lack a providence to lead them.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

(2) Behold the relief to their perplexity! The familiar star is again in sight. Lo, it moves! They follow. It stands over a dwelling. Those brightening scintillations proclaim that the heavenly Royalty is there. Note: It was not reason that guided the Magi to Christ. Reason had its province, and will ever have it. But the effectual guidance, first and last, was supernatural. No man can come to Christ except the Father draw him (see <430644>John 6:44, 45, 65). (3) Exceeding great was the joy of the Magi when they saw the star. It certified the Christ. Certitude to the truth-seeker is bliss. The bliss is intense as the truth is noble. Here the certainty had respect to Truth itself, essential Truth, all truth. Wise, indeed, were the men, and wise are those still, who find this philosophers stone that transmutes all things into good. Good is better than gold. J.A.M. Vers. 11, 12. Gentile worshippers. Guided by the providence of God, the devout scientists from the East, who inquired in Jerusalem for the King of the Jews, are arrived at Bethlehem. Now they enter the house of the carpenter. Let us also enter, that we may see and worship with them.

I. WHAT DO THEY SEE?

1 . They behold the King of the Jews. (1) He is denoted by the star. Some think it entered the dwelling and formed as a nimbus round the Infants head. This notion was ancient, and has suggested to painters their practice of depicting a glory surrounding the head of Jesus. The evidence in favour of this opinion is not very clear. The star sufficiently indicated the Prince of Israel as it stood blazing in the atmosphere directly over his dwelling. No palace was ever so honoured as this humble residence. The morning star indicates the place and rising of the sun.

(2) He is denoted by the prophet. The passage cited from Micah by the Sanhedrin, together with the star, declared the Babe of Bethlehem to be the Ruler whose goings forth have been from the days of eternity. The greatness of Christ is conspicuous in his gentleness. (3) He is denoted by the angel. For the Magi were warned of God in a dream presumably by the angel of the Lord who afterwards in a dream
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

appeared to Joseph. Note: The testimony concerning the Messiahship of Jesus is ample (cf. <051915>Deuteronomy 19:15; <401816>Matthew 18:16). Unbelief is as perilous as it is defence-less (see <051706>Deuteronomy 17:6). 2 . They see him veiled in humanity. (1) His humanity was real. The young Child. Born as other children, though very differently conceived. With his mother. Nourished as an ordinary infant. (2) Note in the truth of the humanity of Jesus: (a) The reality of our interest in his mission and work. (b) The reality and perfection of his sympathy with us. (3) So let us be encouraged (a) to open all our anxieties to him; (b) to trust him with a perfect confidence. 3 . They see Immanuel in humiliation. (1) He is the King of the Jews; but, in this humble dwelling, in what contrast to the magnificence of Solomon! Note: True grandeur is spiritual. Mind is above matter. (2) How much greater still is the contrast! The King of the Jews, in the carpenters house, attended only by his poor mother; and the King of glory, in the heights of heaven, attended by his myriad retinue of angels! (3) Let us read in this (a) how humanity is dignified in Christ; (b) how in him the Divine royalty of man is and may be asserted amidst circumstances of reverse.

4 . They see a heavenly vision. (1) Whether God warned them by his Shechinah or by his angel, when in their dream or trance, in that revelation their faith was richly rewarded. (2) Their obedience to the heavenly vision also became a means to the important end of preserving Christ from the fury of Herod. So are faithful defenders of Christ and his cause still the honoured instruments of preserving his life in his Church.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

(3) Their obedience secured also their own safety. For had they rather obeyed Herod and returned to him, they might have fallen victims to his tyranny under a construction of treason in acknowledging a rival King of the Jews. The way of duty is safety as well as honour.

II. HOW DO THEY WORSHIP?

1 . They worship Jesus as the King of the Jews. (1) They fell down, etc., put themselves into that attitude which Orientals are accustomed to assume in presence of royalty. (2) Opening their treasures, etc. It was also customary in the East to bring gilts to kings. Note: (a) The powers that be are ordained of God, and should therefore be religiously respected. (b) Kings exist for the order and happiness of states, and should therefore be religiously sustained in the due exercise of their functions. 2 . They worship Jesus as the Christ of God. (1) They did not journey from the distant East to pay respect to an ordinary prince. The star had marked this prince as extraordinary and supernatural. Prophecy also had declared him to be Divine. (2) These Gentiles, in coming to the King of the Jews, claimed an interest in his kingdom. They did not honour Herod as they honoured Jesus. Neither did they pay religious worship to Mary. (3) The humble circumstances in which they found the Christ did not discourage their faith. Now, since nations have come to acknowledge him, faith has become fashionable.

3 . They worshipped him with gifts. (1) They presented themselves. This, in the first place, is most important. The living sacrifice. The reasonable service. (2) They consecrated their substance. Gold, etc. (see <197210>Psalm 72:10). Some will give to Christ personal service, but withhold property. Others will give property, but withhold personal service. The Magi gave both. Christ is worthy of all homage. 4 . Their worship was typical.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

(1) The mention of gold and frankincense refers us back to <236006>Isaiah 60:6, where the gathering of the Gentiles is foretold (see also <370208>Haggai 2:8). The respect paid to Christ by these Gentiles was a happy presage and specimen of what would follow when those who were afar off should be made nigh by Christ (Henry). (2) The shepherds of Bethlehem found Christ before the Magi found him. The gospel came to the Jew first. But, though Bethlehem was but half a dozen miles from Jerusalem, the Magi do not appear to have been accompanied by any of the Sanhedrin or citizens. The Gentiles received the gospel when it was rejected by the Jews. Heathendom is accepting it as Christendom is rejecting it. Those nearest to the means are often furthest from the end (cf. <400811>Matthew 8:11, 12). 5 . their gifts were symbolical. (1) Some think the gold was given as tribute to the King; the frankincense in recognition of his Divinity , because God is honoured with incense; and the myrrh in recognition of his humanity , and that as man he should die , because myrrh was used in embalming (see <431908>John 19:89). (2) Perhaps their purpose was to confess Christ as universal King. They presented themselves as representing the kingdom of men, and the whole animated creation at whose head man stands. The frankincense and myrrh would represent the vegetable kingdom. Gold in like manner would represent the mineral. Christ, who carried his miracle-working into every kingdom of nature, is destined to receive universal homage (see
<490110>

Ephesians 1:10, 20-23; <502609>Philippians 2:9-11; <510116>Colossians

1:16;
<660411>

Revelation 4:11).

(3) Or perhaps they may have designed to express simply their faith in Jesus as

the Christ. Thus they came seeking the King of the Jews, and now they give him gold, or pay tribute to him as such. But then the King of the Jews is the King Messiah. Their faith in Jesus as such would be expressed in the myrrh, which was a leading ingredient in the composition of the holy anointing oil (see <023023>Exodus 30:23). The ointment in composition they could not present, for it would have been unlawful for them to compound it. But further, since all excellences in perfection existed in Christ, they would express this in their donation of frankincense; for this was a principal ingredient in the holy perfume, viz. that which common persons must neither compound nor use ( <023034>Exodus 30:34). The
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

Bridegroom, in the Canticles, is described as coming out of the wilderness, like pillars of smoke, perfumed with myrrh and frankincense, with all powders of the merchant (Song of Solomon 3:6). The cloud of the Shechinah, the holy oil, and the holy perfume are here together associated to describe the qualities of Christ. J.A.M. Vers. 13 -15. System in providence. It were a truism to say that there is wisdom in providence; for otherwise providence could not be Divine. In that wisdom there is what Paul describes as a manifoldness ( <490310>Ephesians 3:10). And this appears in a system of developments and correspondences, evincing at the same time unity of plan. The text furnishes striking illustrations. It suggests

I. THAT THE PEOPLE OF ISRAEL WERE CHRIST TYPICAL.

1 . For Hosea s allusion is historical. His words are these: When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt ( <281101>Hosea 11:1). The reference plainly is to the bringing forth of the people of Israel from Egypt by the hand of Moses and Aaron. Moreover, it is a paraphrase upon the words of Gods message to Pharaoh ( <020422>Exodus 4:22, 23). From the history we learn: (1) That the suffering of Gods people is no certain proof of his displeasure. (2) That it may evince his love as that of a Father to a child who needs discipline and education. (3) That when loves ends are served the discipline will end. 2 . Hosea s words are still prophetic. (1) That they contain a mystery is clear from the manner in which they speak of

the nation as a person. This is the converse of the manner in which the same prophet makes the real Jacob or Israel stand for the nation descended from him (cf. <281203>Hosea 12:3-6). (2) The evangelist explains the mystery as containing a prophecy of Christ. In doing this he is countenanced by prophetic analogies. Thus Jehovah, speaking evidently of Messiah, says, Thou art my servant, O Israel, in whom I will be glorified ( <234903>Isaiah 49:3). Again, Behold my Servant, whom I uphold; mine Elect, in whom my soul delighteth ( <234201>Isaiah 42:1).
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

This the LXX. construes thus: Jacob my servant, and Israel mine elect; while in the Chaldee it is, My servant the Messiah. This paraphrase is clearly justified by the context. 3 . So the history in the Law likewise is prophetic. (1) Dr. Alix remarks that the author of Midrash Tehillim, on <190207>Psalm 2:7, says, The mysteries of the King Messiah are declared in the Law, the Prophets, and the Hagiographa. In the Law it is written ( <020422>Exodus 4:22), Israel is my son, even my firstborn. Rabbi Nathan, in Sehemath Rabba, on those words speaks thus: As I made Jacob my firstborn ( <020422>Exodus 4:22), so have I made Messiah my firstborn; as it is said ( <198927>Psalm 89:27), I will make him my Firstborn, higher than the kings of the earth. (2) The perils, then, in which Israel typified Christ, viz. as they are presented in the passages before us, are: (a) His Sonship. (b) His election. (c) His sojourn in Egypt. (d) His return and advancement to dignity and glory.

II. THAT GOD BROUGHT CHRIST TYPICAL OUT OF EGYPT.

1 . The system of providence is seen in presages. (1) The sojourn of Israel in Egypt was presaged in the personal history of Abraham their father. For early in that history there was a famine in the land [of Canaan]: and Abram went down to Egypt to sojourn there. In that land he found not only asylum, but generous treatment, and acquired property. Afterwards the Lord plagued Pharaoh and his house with great plagues because of Sarai Abrams wife; and these plagues induced Pharaoh to send him away ( <011214>Genesis 12:14-20).

(2) That in all this there was an allegory Abram might have learnt from his subsequent experience (see <011511>Genesis 15:11-16). The horror of darkness was evidently a premonition of the sufferings his seed were destined to pass through in the dark land of Egypt (see Gesenius, under j ). 2 . So is it seen in their accomplishment. (1) Josephs dreams were prophetic sketches of what afterwards became history.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

(2) The fulfilment of the dreams of Joseph was also the accomplishment of the presages of Abram. The famine in Syria. The provision of plenty in Egypt in connection with which Joseph, by the good hand of God upon him, came into power. The settlement of Israel in Egypt. His sufferings there when the services of Joseph were forgotten. The plaguing of Pharaoh. The Exodus.

III. THAT GOD BROUGHT CHRIST LITERAL OUT or EGYPT.

1 . Correspondences are seen in the agents. (1) We note a correspondence of names. In each case we have a Joseph, and moreover a Joseph the son of Jacob. (2) We have also a correspondence of character. The son of Rachel was eminently a righteous man, and so likewise was the husband of Mary. Both were alike distinguished for their unswerving loyalty and obedience to God. (3) There is, moreover, a correspondence of dreams. God honours those who honour him. (a) As the latter Joseph by his alliance with Christ came to converse with angels, so have all who are spiritually related to Christ intercourse with Heaven (cf. <580114>Hebrews 1:14; 12:22). (b) If the reason of Gods communicating with men in dreams be that in sleep mens minds are disengaged from the world, the lesson is that if we would come under special heavenly influences we must call off our affections from earthly things. 2 . Correspondences are seen in the accidents. (1) Flee into Egypt. God can make the worst places serve the best purposes (cf. <661216>Revelation 12:16).

(2) Jesus, like Israel of old, was in Egypt for asylum. For Herod will seek the young Child to destroy him. God knows the purposes of his enemies (cf. <233728>Isaiah 37:28). (3) Jesus was nourished there evidently by the hand of God, as Israel was in the days of the earlier Joseph. The carpenter was so poor that Mary had to offer doves instead of a lamb (cf. <031208>Leviticus 12:8 with <420224>Luke 2:24). He had no difficulty in gathering up his effects to set off for Egypt the same night in which he had his orders. If rich people have the
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

advantage of the poor while they possess what they have, the poor have the advantage of the rich when they are called to part with it (Henry). But how, then, could this Joseph subsist his sacred Charge in a strange land? He who gave the years of plenty to the ancient Joseph for the nourishment of his typical son, placed the gold of the Magi in the hand of his namesake for the preservation of the Son of his love. (4) There was in the days of Israels sojourn in Egypt a slaughter of the male children of that people by order of Pharaoh, from which Moses, the future redeemer of the nation, was wonderfully spared. Who does not see in this a prophecy of the deliverance of Jesus from Herods slaughter of the innocents? (5) The retribution for this came upon Pharaoh in the death of his firstborn when the firstborn of Israel was spared, and eventually upon himself also in the destruction at the Red Sea. So Herods death followed quickly upon his massacre of the innocents. And as the overthrow of Pharaoh was coincident with the escape of Israel, for on the other shore of the Red Sea he was out of Egypt; so the death of Herod was the signal for the calling out of Egypt of the true Son of God. The end of the wicked is death. They have everything to fear from time. The good have everything to hope from it.

IV. THAT GOD WILL BRING CHRIST MYSTICAL OUT OF EGYPT.

1 . The Church of true believers is the mystical Christ. (1) So Paul describes the Church as the body of which Christ is the Head ( <451204>Romans 12:4, 5; <461016>1 Corinthians 10:16, 17; <490122>Ephesians 1:22, 23; 4:15, 16; 5:23, 30; <510118>Colossians 1:18, 24). The head and the body make up one Christ. (2) Hence the Church is called Christ ( <460812>1 Corinthians 8:12; <480316>Galatians 3:16 with ver. 29). (3) Agreeably to this Israel after the flesh, which we have seen to have been a

type of Christ, is often made a type also of the Israel of God, or true Christian Church. 2 . What is predicated of Christ is mystically predicable of his Church. (1) The mystical Egypt is that state of moral darkness and bondage in which we are by nature and former practice.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

(2) The mystical Pharaoh, or Herod, is Satan, who is the tyrant of the moral house of bondage. So the persecuting powers of the world, which have ever been instinct with the spirit of the old serpent, are described under the figure of a dragon a monster whose zoological type is the crocodile of the Nile (Revelation 12.); fittingly so, since the Egyptian was the first really formidable political incarnation of Satan. (3) Deliverance through Christ from the bondage of sin and tyranny of Satan is compared to that of Israel from Egypt. ]t is also compared to the coming up of Christ from that land, as in the text. (4) The early and brief sojourn of Jesus in Egypt was a presage of the early but too transient Christianizing of the laud of the Pharaohs. As there was a very flourishing Church in Egypt in the early Christian ages, so may there be again in the generations of the future (cf. <052307>Deuteronomy 23:7; <231924> Isaiah 19:24, 25). Providence and grace are interwoven in wisdom. Never let us murmur against, evermore let us trust, that wisdom which is manifold and profound. J.A.M. Vers. 16 -18. Providence in evil. Josephus does not mention this massacre. The event occurred ninety-four years before he wrote; it was but one of the many frightful atrocities of Herod, and, not being apparently connected with any political event, was easily passed over by him. Lardner, however, cites Macrobius, a heathen author of the fourth century, who refers to it thus: When he [Augustus Caesar] heard that among those male infants above two years old which Herod, the King of the Jews, ordered to be slain in Syria, one of his sons was also murdered, he said, It is better to be Herods hog than his son. The event is also thus noticed in a rabbinical work called Toldath Jesu: And the king gave orders for putting to death every infant to be found in Bethlehem. The history cannot be doubted, but we are now concerned with its lessons. It teaches

I. THAT MORAL EVIL IS PERMITTED THOUGH NOT ORDAINED OF

GOD. 1 . It cannot be ordained of God. (1) That would be to approve what his goodness must abhor. Given his infinity, he must be infinitely good. Infinitely evil he cannot be, for ample
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

proofs of his goodness surround us. Partially good he cannot be, for then where would be his infinity? (2) His abhorrence of the atrocity of Herod is graphically set forth in the prophetic description of Rachels wailing ( <243115>Jeremiah 31:15-17). Ramah was one of the borders of Bethlehem perhaps marked the limit or radius of the tragedy. It belonged to Benjamin ( <061825>Joshua 18:25). Rachel, the mother of Benjamin, and ancestress of many of these bereaved mothers, was buried in the hill overlooking the area of the slaughter ( <013519>Genesis 35:19, 20; 48:7), yet within the border of Benjamin ( <091002>1 Samuel 10:2). She is here finely represented as moved with horror in her very tomb, and rising thence, coming forth and wailing in the wailing of her daughters. Her voice, in theirs, is also heard, viz. by the God of judgment (cf. <590504>James 5:4). Note: The connection of the spiritual world with this is intimate. If there be joy in the presence of the angels of God over a sinner repenting, may there not be grief amongst departed spirits over the evil deeds of men (cf. <581201>Hebrews 12:1)? 2 . Moral evil is the work of evil moral agents. (1) Moral agency the actors must possess to constitute their actions evil in the moral sense. Physical evil is quite another thing, essentially different. (2) Such a moral agent was Herod. Then Herod, when he saw that he was mocked of the Wise Men, was exceeding wroth, and sent forth and slew, etc. Note: (a) Wicked men are never so gratified as when they can make wisdom subservient to their ends. Absalom, in his unnatural rebellion, sent for Ahithophel ( <101512>2 Samuel 15:12). (b) They are exceeding wroth when the wise elude their grasp or disappoint them of their prey.

(c) They do not see that they are mocked of God (cf. <190204>Psalm 2:4; 37:13). (3) Such agents were the murderers Herod employed. He was moved by blood thirst and jealousy; they were moved by love of gain and fear of the tyrants resentment. (4) Such an agent is Satan. He is the evil one, viz. whose spirit is wholly evil. He was here especially active in his uncivil enmity against the Seed of the woman ( <010315>Genesis 3:15).
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

3 . God is not necessarily chargeable with what he permits. (1) That God permits the existence of moral evil is indisputable. The fact of its existence proves this. Omnipotence could instantly annihilate every evil being. For the permitting of evil God is therefore responsible, viz. to himself. (2) But whether the permitting be good or evil must be determined by the reasons for it. If the reasons be good, then the permitting, even of moral evil, must be good. (3) Of the quality of these reasons God is himself the best judge. Some of his reasons he has disclosed. Thus without such permission there could be no scope for moral freedom. Other reasons he reserves to be revealed in due time. (4) Since God is responsible only to himself, and since his ways to us are past finding out, it is alike foolish and impious in us to attempt to judge him or cherish hard thoughts of him.

II. THAT THE PHYSICAL EVIL IS BOTH PERMITTED AND ORDAINED

OF GOD. 1 . It is permitted to afflict the morally innocent. (1) The babes murdered by Herod suffered without any provocation on their part given. God never ordained or commanded that they should thus suffer. But he permitted it; for he could have hindered it. He that interposed to save Christ might also have saved the lives of the infants that perished for his sake. He might have cut short Herods life by two years, for he died within two years of this massacre. God is not wanting in resources. (2) Then was fulfilled. This is the note of permission. In cases where God actively interfered, or gave effect to an ordination, the phrase is, That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord, etc. ( <400122>Matthew 1:22; 2:23).

2 . It is ordained for the punishment of sin. (1) God has constituted the physical and moral in the universe to act and react each on the other. Thus the body and soul stand mutually related for action and reaction. And through the body the soul acts upon the outer world and suffers its reactions.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

(2) The reactions of moral goodness are physically beneficial, while those of moral evil are correspondingly injurious. So by natural sequence sin is physically punished. 3 . It is ordained as a warning against sin. To this end physical evil is made emblematical of the moral. (1) Injuries and privations of the body represent corresponding injuries and privations of the soul mutilations, lameness, blindness, deafness, etc. (2) Diseases of the body represent corresponding diseases of the soul leprosy, palsy, fever, etc. (3) Diseases of the mind represent maladies of the heart demoniacal possession, insanity, idiocy.

III. THAT GOOD IS ORDAINED AND EVIL MADE SUBSERVIENT TO IT.

1 . Good was ordained in the creation of moral beings. (1) Angels had a first estate, which was good; for it is contrasted with the evil estate into which some of them fell. (2) So man was made upright. God himself pronounced this work of his creation very good. (3) These as moral beings had freedom. This also was good. For without this moral freedom what would they have been? Machines, vegetables, animals, imbeciles. (4) This freedom did not necessitate the moral evil which it rendered possible. Angels might all have kept their first estate, as some did. Our first parents might have resisted their tempter.

(5) The sinner, therefore, is responsible for his sin. 2 . Good was ordained in the redemption of simmers. (1) To this good end Jesus was born, was preserved from the fury of Herod, offered himself as a sin Sacrifice. Sinners are justified through faith in his blood. So evil is made subservient to good. (2) To this end the Holy Spirit is given, by whose gracious working believers are sealed and sanctified. So further good comes out of evil.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

(3) To this end also Jesus is enthroned in heaven. Having triumphed over all forces of evil, powers of darkness, in his cross, and over death in his grave, he is able to destroy Satan in us and deliver us from the last enemy, that we may rise and reign with him in glory. 3 . The subserviency of evil to good will appear in the issues of the judgment. (1) Innocent sufferers will then be compensated. We have heard the wailing of Rachel; let us now listen to the words of her consolation: Thus saith the Lord; Refrain thy voice from weeping, and thine eyes from tears: for thy work shall be rewarded, saith the Lord; and they shall come again from the land of the enemy [the ]and of death]. And there is hope in thine end [the Ahareth , or last period of the nation], that thy children shall come again to their own border ( <243116>Jeremiah 31:16, 17). In the resurrection they shall receive the martyrs compensation, the inheritance and the crown. (2) Incorrigible sinners will come forth to their doom. Herod and his myrmidons will be confronted by the innocents. In their punishment God will vindicate his justice, and it will be a moral to the universe. Note: There is no hope for the sinner out of Christ. J.A.M. Vers. 19-23. Providence in prophecy and history. Matthew, perhaps more constantly than any other New Testament writer, notes fulfilment of prophecy in events of history. His Gospel, which was the first written, was primarily intended for the Jews, who were familiar with this class of evidence, and would naturally look for it. The evidence is intrinsically very important, amongst other things evincing a Providence all-wise and all-powerful.

I. THAT CANNOT BE A CHANCE WHICH IS CIRCUMSTANTIALLY

ACCURATELY FORETOLD.

1 . Vague utterances are outside this argument. Such are those which may be interpreted either way. Such were those of the heathen oracles. Such are not those of Scripture prophecy. 2 . Guesses also are out of the question.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

(1) These may occasionally come true, viz. when they concern things of usual occurrence. (2) That they should constantly come true is incredible. The ratio of probabilities is mathematically determinable. (3) That guesses should constantly come true when hazarded in relation to things extraordinary and supernatural is next thing to impossible. But the subjects of Scripture prophecy are these very things.

II. THE PROPHECIES OF SCRIPTURE, WHILE THEY CONCERN THINGS

UNIQUE, ARE MINUTELY CIRCUMSTANTIAL. 1 . Those concerning Messiah answer this description. (1) Never before his appearance was there any person to compare with him. Never since. He was unique in all points. (2) Yet was he very fully described in prophecy. As the stream of time flowed on since the first utterance ( <010315>Genesis 3:15), feature became added to feature by successive seers, until the collective testimony presents a proto-biography wonderfully complete. 2 . Witness the sample respecting his infancy here given. (1) His incarnation by a virgin mother of the family of David (cf. <400122> Matthew 1:22-24 with <230713>Isaiah 7:13, 14). (2) The occurrence of this stupendous event in the town of Bethlehem of Judah (cf. vers. 5, 6 with <330502>Micah 5:2). (3) The appearance of a star by which the Magi were guided in accordance with Balaams parable (see <042415>Numbers 24:15-19).

(4) The slaughter of the innocents (cf. vers. 16-18 with <243115>Jeremiah 31:1517). (5) The deliverance of Jesus from that slaughter, which prophecy required, as he had to fulfil many predictions there written (see <422444>Luke 24:44-48). (6) The flight into Egypt (cf. vers. 13-15, 19-21, with <020422>Exodus 4:22, 23; <281101> Hosea 11:1). (7) The residence in Nazareth of Galilee, in connection with which he came to be called a Nazarene. Wonderful, is the credulity of that unbelief which can see nothing in such a tissue of evidence.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

3 . But where in prophecy is he described as a Nazarene ? (1) We may find this in the law of the Nazarite taken as a prophecy. (2) Therefore also in those Nazarites, such as Samson, who must be viewed as typical persons (see <071305>Judges 13:5-7; 16:17). Note: Jesus was in spirit, not in the letter, a Nazarite (see <401118>Matthew 11:18, 19). (3) We may also find it in those prophecies which set forth the humiliation and odium to which Messiah was to be subjected. For the name Nazarene became a term of reproach (cf. <430114>John 1:14; see also <192206> Psalm 22:6; 69:6-10; <235303>Isaiah 53:3, 12). (4) If Nazarene be derived from rzn , this word signifies not only to separate , but also to crown. When Pilate in scorn set over Jesus the inscription, Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews, Jesus was then in derision also crowned , viz. with thorns. God makes the very derision of his enemies to praise him.

III. THINGS NOT FORETOLD ARE YET FOREKNOWN.

1 . The knowledge of things foretold implies a foreknowledge also of things to be historically interwoven with them. (1) Thus a foreknowledge of the slaughter of the innocents implies a foreknowledge also of Herod, his character, and resources. (2) The time of Herods death also must have been foreknown, since the return of Jesus from Egypt, a thing foretold, was historically made contingent upon it. (3) The succession of Archelaus to the throne of Herod must likewise have been foreknown, for the retirement of Jesus into Nazareth of Galilee, a thing foretold, was historically made contingent upon this. Archelaus, as Ethnarch (by courtesy called King) of Judaea, would be likely to inherit his fathers jealousy and

caution, as he was well known to have inherited his cruelty and tyranny (see Josephus, Ant., 17. c. 10). 2 . Thus the foreknowledge of things interwoven with things .foretold implies a corresponding foreknowledge of things interwoven with these. (1) This follows by the same rule. So in turn of things interwoven with these. Thus a perfect knowledge of anything must involve a perfect knowledge of everything.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

(2) Such, therefore, is the intelligence of Divine providence as witnessed in the evidence of prophecy. Such intelligence may be implicitly trusted for guidance. Such guidance should be earnestly sought.

IV. THERE IS A PROVIDENCE OF HISTORY AS WELL AS OF

PROPHECY. 1 . God is not simply an Omniscient Spectator. (1) He was more than a Spectator when he inspired his prophets. (2) He is also a Worker in history. 2 . Instances of his direct interference with the factors of history are here recorded. He interfered: (1) To prevent the Magi from returning to Herod. (2) To prompt Joseph to fly into Egypt. (3) To direct the return of the holy family from Egypt. (4) To instruct their retirement into Galilee. (5) To provide, viz. in the gifts of the Magi, for their subsistence. 3 . This intervention was necessary to the fulfilment of prophecy. (1) The same Being who inspired the predictions wrought in their accomplishment. He let none of the words of his prophets fall to the ground (cf. <090319>1 Samuel 3:19; 9:6). (2) If prophecy reveals the providence of knowledge , history no less truly reveals the providence of power.

V. THE PROVIDENCE OF HISTORY, LIKE THAT OF PROPHECY, IS ALLCOMPRISING. 1 . Since God works in events necessary to the fulfilment of prophecy , he must

work in all events. (1) For what events are there that are not tending to the fulfilment of prophecy? The subjects of prophecy are race-wide in their range, and extend along the whole course of time. (2) The central line of events, more prominently delineated in prophecy, are historically interwoven with other events, these with others, and so forth. So if the interference of a providential Worker is required in respect to the central line, his working will be required from the centre outwards to the very bounds of action. Hence:
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

2 . There is a supernatural energy in the commonest events. The case may be stated thus: (1) The universe is dual , consisting of matter and spirit. (2) These complements act and react upon each other. (3) The whole is under one supreme control, infinitely intelligent, possessing illimitable resources of wisdom and efficiency. As Omniscience surveys all things, Omnipotence works in all things. (4) In some things it pleases God to show his knowledge, as in prophecy; in some, his power, as in converting prophecy into history. Where he does this we call the event supernatural and miraculous. (5) But in truth there is as much of the supernatural, i.e. as much of the presence and working of God, where he does not show it in deviations from the usual, as where he does so deviate. Therefore we may: (1) Rejoice evermore. (2) Pray without ceasing. (3) In everything give thanks. J.A.M.

HOMILIES BY R. TUCK
Ver. 2. Born a King; died a King; lives a King. The term king suggests the three forms in which the Kingship of Christ may be presented: (1) the King he was to be;

(2) the King he seemed to be; (3) the King he proves to be. For introduction show what associations of kingship could have been in the minds of the Eastern Magi. The idea of the uprising of world-conquerors had been made familiar by the stories of Nebuchadnezzar, Alexander, and Caesar; and we have the authority of the pagan writer, Suetonius, for the fact that an ancient and constant opinion had become prevalent all over the East, that it was contained in the fates that at that time certain ones arising from Judaea should gain universal dominion. No doubt it is largely
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

true that prophecy tends to fulfil itself, but in this case the fulfilment took such shape as most clearly indicated Divine control and direction. With this idea in the minds of the Magi, they would easily be guided by their astrological observations. What they looked for was, in some sense, a universal King; and that, in the fullest sense, Jesus was.

I. THE KING HE WAS TO BE. There was nothing evidently kingly about the
circumstances and surroundings of this Babe. Yet the Magi expected him to turn out a King. But what sort of a King was it expected that he would be? Here follow three lines: 1 . The line of Scripture prophecy, noticing all figures of Messiah as King. 2 . The line of Scripture, and after-Scripture, history. Especially dealing with Daniels presentations, and showing how the success of the Maccabees fixed the form of the Messianic hope. 3 . The line of world-conquering kings outside Scripture history. It is well to fix Very clearly that the King universally expected was a delivering, conquering, redeeming King; and such Jesus was, in high, holy, spiritual senses.

II. THE KING HE SEEMED TO BE. Hanging on a cross, an inscription over

his head, This is Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews. His Kingship seemed a miserable, hopeless failure; a claim which men scorned with a cross.. For that inscription was Pilates scorn of the pretensions of his spiritless prisoner, and Pilates insult of those who had made him act as if the claim were of importance. What would you say of Christs Kingship, judging by the appearances?

III. THE KING HE PROVES TO BE. Exalted a Prince and a Saviour.

1 . The first of men in every department is king in that department. 2 . From our Lords answer to Pilate, we learn that the truth-bearer is a king.

3 . Our Lord dealt with sin and its physical result, disease, in truly kingly fashion. 4 . Because his work is accepted, he is entrusted with mediatorial sovereignty, is King of the spiritual world, King of souls, dispensing pardon to sinners and grace to saints. R.T.
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

Ver. 2. The individuality of Divine leadings. We have seen his star in the East. God leads each one in his own way, but the way he chooses is the precisely appropriate way for each one. Simple shepherds, with Scripture associations, are led by angel-testimony and angel-song from the night-skies. Wise Magi, with the astrological associations, are led by the varying appearances of planets and stars in the clear Eastern heavens. Angels, or stars, they do but fit to the differing needs of men. And so is suggested to us the important truth that, while Gods saving dealings with men are always one , their forms are variously adapted to the condition and disposition and ability of each. And the exceeding grace of God is seen in that adaptation.

I. DIVINE LEADINGS. Two things:

1 . They are direct Divine operations. Whether we see the hand in them or not, the hand is there. 2 . They employ instrumentalities; but, in the very simplicity and naturalness of them, we often miss the Divine working that is at the heart of them. It is easy to see nature-forces making conjunctions of stars to guide Magi, and miss seeing the Divine overrulings that make nature-forces work the Divine will. Whether it be shepherds, Magi, or pious Simeons, the Divine leading of men is to Christ their Saviour. What God is doing with men is bringing them to Jesus.

II. THE INDIVIDUALITY OF DIVINE LEADINGS. No one else was led just
as the shepherds were, and none just as the Magi were. God knows each one, reckons for each one, and deals with each one. There is no being lost in a crowd. There is no fear of unskilful dealing because our case is not precisely understood. We come into the world one by one; we go out one by one; and all the while we are in the world we are simple units before God. Illustrate this individuality of Divine dealings from Bible cases of conversion, such as

(1) Jacob; (2) Manasseh the king; (3) Nicodemus; (4) the Woman of Samaria; (5) Paul; (6) Eunuch of Queen Candace;
<- Previous First Next ->

<- Previous First Next ->

(7) Lydia; (8) Jailor at Philippi. Each a typical, perhaps, but certainly an individual, case.

III. THE GRACE OF THE INDIVIDUALITY OF DIVINE LEADINGS. It

secures fittings and fitness. In each of the above cases show how precise the adaptation was. Show the grace which is always displayed in having things to fit. Show that the grace is proved by the tender consideration for the individual which such adaptation involves. Appeal to our experience of grace adapted to us. R.T. Vers. 5, 6. The honour of a city. Out of thee shall come a Governor. It is not its architecture, or its situation, or its history, or its polity, or its wealth. It is its men. A city is ennobled by the heroes, the poets, the race-leaders, who are born in it. This leads some seven distinct cities to lay claim to be the birthplace of Homer. One of the later psalmists gives expression to this truth, when he says, Glorious things are spoken of thee, O city of God Of Zion it shall be said, This man and that man was born in her; and the Highest himself shall establish her ( <198703>Psalm 87:3-5). Bethlehem was but a little and insignificant town, scarcely more than what we should call a village; not even important for its situation, since it was not on any of the main caravan-routes. And yet it stands out most prominently of all cities in Palestine, save Jerusalem, the capital. Everybody knows Bethlehem. Every traveller must go and see Bethlehem. We should smile at the woeful ignorance of a traveller who did not know enough to compel him to go to Bethlehem. Both the Old Testament and the New give prominence to it, and we may properly call it the twice-honoured city. Descriptions of it, as it was in our Lords time and now, are at very