g Hos. xi. 1. the prophet, saying, Out of Egypt have I called my son. 16 Then Herod, when he saw that he was mocked of the wise men, was exceeding wroth, and sent forth, and slew all the children that were in Bethlehem, and in all the i coasts thereof, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had diligently enquired of the wise men. 17 Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the hJxn. xxxi. 15. prophet, saying, 18 h In Rama was there a voice heard, [lamentation and] weeping, and great mourning, Rachel komit. i render, borders: see ch. iv. 13, where the word in the original is the same. matter. 13.] The command was immediate; and at once. Besides, there might have been Joseph made no delay. He must be understood, on account of "by night" below, as having arisen the same night and departed forthwith. Egypt, as near, as a Roman province and independent of Herod, and much inhabited by Jews, was an easy and convenient refuge. 15. Out of Egypt] This citation shews the almost universal application in the N. T. of the prophetic writings to the expected Messiah, as the general antitype of all the events of the typical dispensation. We shall have occasion to remark the same again and again in the course of the Gospels. It seems to have been a received axiom of interpretation (which has, by its adoption in the N. T., received the sanction of the Holy Spirit Himself, and now stands for our guidance), that the subject of all allusions, the represented in all parables and dark sayings, was He who was to come, or the circumstances attendant on His advent and reign.-The words are written in Hosea of the children of Israel, and are rendered from the Hebrew. -A similar expression with regard to Israel is found in Exod. iv. 22, 23. that it might be fulfilled must not be explained away: it never denotes the event or mere result, but always the purpose. 16.] Josephus makes no mention of this slaughter; nor is it likely that he would have done. Probably no great number of children perished in so small a place as Bethlehem and its neighbourhood. The modern objections to this narrative may be answered best by remembering the monstrous character of this tyrant, of whom Josephus asserts, "a dark choler seized on him, maddening him against all." Herod had marked the way to his throne, and his reign itself, with blood; had murdered his wife and three sons (the last just about this time); and was likely enough, in blind fury, to have made no enquiries, but given the savage order a reason for not making enquiry, but rather taking the course he did, which was sure, as he thought, to answer the end, without divulging the purpose. The word "privily" in ver. 7 seems to favour this view. was mocked] The Evangelist is speaking of Herod's view of the the borders thereof] The word coasts is the common rendering of the Greek horia in the A. V. It does not imply any bordering on a sea shore, but is an old use for parts, or neighbourhood, as côte in French. See margin of A. V. the borders thereof will betoken the insulated houses, and hamlets, which belonged to the territory of Bethlehem. from two years old] This expression must not be taken as any very certain indication of the time when the star did actually appear. The addition and under implies that there was uncertainty in Herod's mind as to the age pointed out; and if so, why might not the jealous tyrant, although he had accurately ascertained the date of the star's appearing, have taken a range of time extending before as well as after it, the more surely to attain his point? 17. that which was spoken by Jeremy] Apparently, an accommodation of the prophecy in Jer. xxxi. 15, which was originally written of the Babylonish captivity. We must not draw any fanciful distinction between "then was fulfilled" and "that might be fulfilled," but rather seek our explanation in the acknowledged system of prophetic interpretation among the Jews, still extant in their rabbinical books, and now sanctioned to us by N. T. usage; at the same time remembering, for our caution, how little even now we understand of the full bearing of prophetic and typical words and acts. None of the expressions of this prophecy must be closely and literally pressed. The link of connexion seems to be Rachel's sepulchre, which (Gen. xxxv. 19: see also weeping for her children, and would not be comforted, because they are not. 19 But when Herod was dead, behold, an angel of the Lord appeareth in a dream to Joseph in Egypt, 20 saying, Arise, and take the young child and his mother, and go into the land of Israel: for they are dead which sought the young child's life. 21 And he arose, and took the young child and his mother, and came into the land of Israel. 22 But when he heard that Archelaus did reign in Judæa in the room of his father Herod, he was afraid to go thither: mnotwithstanding being warned of God in a dream, he turned aside into the parts of Galilee: 23 and he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, 'He shall be called a Nazarene. 1 render, over. 1 Sam. x. 2) was in the way to Bethlehem;' and from that circumstance, perhaps, the inhabitants of that place are called her children. We must also take into account the close relation between the tribes of Judah and Benjamin, which had long subsisted. Ramah was six miles to the north of Jerusalem, in the tribe of Benjamin (Jer. xl. 1: "Er-Ram, marked by the village and green patch on its summit, the most conspicuous object from a distance in the approach to Jerusalem from the South, is certainly Ramah of Benjamin." Stanley, Sinai and Palestine, p. 213); so that neither must this part of the prophecy be strictly taken. 20. for they are dead] The plural here is not merely idiomatic, nor for lenity and forbearance, in speaking of the dead; but perhaps a citation from Exod. iv. 19, where the same words are spoken to Moses, or betokens, not the number, but the category. Herod the Great died of a dreadful disease at Jericho, in the seventieth year of his age, and the thirtyeighth of his reign, A.U.C. 750. 22.] ARCHELAUS was the son of Herod by Malthace, a Samaritan woman: he was brought up at Rome; succeeded his father, but never had the title of king, only that of Ethnarch, with the government of Idumæa, Judæa, and Samaria, the rest of his father's dominions being divided between his brothers Philip and Antipas. But, (1) very likely the word reign is here used in the wider meaning :-(2) Archelaus did, in the beginning of his reign, give out and regard himself as king: (3) in ch. xiv. 9, Herod the Tetrarch is called the King. m render, and. i see note. In the ninth year of his government Arche- If III. 1 In those days came John the Baptist, preaching Egypt. 23. that it might be fulfilled] These words refer to the divine purpose in the event, not to that of Joseph in bringing it about. which was spoken by the prophets] These words are nowhere verbatim to be found, nor is this asserted by the Evangelist; but that the sense of the prophets is such. In searching for such sense, the following hypotheses have been made-none of them satisfactory: (1) Euthymius says, "Do not enquire what prophets said this: for you will not find out because many of the prophetic books have perished, some in the captivities, some by neglect of the Jews, some also by foul play." So also Chrysostom and others. But the expression "by the prophets" seems to have a wider bearing than is thus implied. (2) Others say, the general sense of the prophets is, that Christ should be a despised person, as the inhabitants of Nazareth were (John i. 47). But surely this part of the Messiah's prophetic character is not general or prominent enough, in the absence of any direct verbal connexion with the word in our text, to found such an interpretation on: nor, on the other hand, does it appear that an inhabitant of Nazareth, as such, was despised; only that the obscurity of the town was, both by Nathanael and the Jews, contrasted with our Lord's claims. (3) The Nazarites of old were men holy and consecrated to God; e. g. Samson (Judg. xiii. 5), Samuel (1 Sam. i. 11), and to this the words are referred by Tertullian, Jerome, and others. But (a) our Lord did not (like John the Baptist) lead a life in accordance with the Nazarite vow, but drank wine, &c., and set himself in marked contrast with John in this very particular (ch. xi. 18, 19); and (b) the word here is not Nazarite, but Nazarene, denoting an inhabitant of Nazareth. (4) There may be an allusion to the Hebrew "Netser," a branch, by which name our Lord is called in Isa. xi. 1, and from which word it appears that the name Nazareth is probably derived. So learned Hebrews" mentioned by Jerome on Isa. xi. 1, and others. But this word is only used in the place cited; and in by far the more precise prophecies of the Branch, Zech. iii. 8; vi. 12: Jer. xxiii. 5; xxxiii. 15, and Isa. iv. 2, the word "Tsemach" is used.—I leave it, therefore, as an unsolved difficulty. CHAP. III. 1-12.] PREACHING AND BAPTISM OF JOHN. Mark i. 1-8: Luke iii. 1-17 (John i. 6-28). Here the synoptic narrative (i. e. the narrative common to the 1. In three Evangelists) begins, its extent being the same as that specified by Peter in Acts i. 22, from the baptism of John unto that same day that He was taken up from us.' For a comparison of the narratives in the various sections, see notes on St. Mark. In this Gospel, I have generally confined myself to the subject-matter. those days] The last matter mentioned was the dwelling at Nazareth: and though we must not take the connexion strictly as implying that Joseph dwelt there all the intermediate thirty years, "those days" must be understood to mean that we take up the persons of the narrative where we left them; i. e. dwelling at Nazareth. came] literally, comes forward- makes his appearance.' Euthymius asks the question, whence? and answers it, from the recesses of the wilderness. But this can hardly be, owing to the "in the wilderness" following. The verb is used absolutely. The title "John the Baptist" shews that St. Matthew was writing for those who well knew John the Baptist as an historical personage. Josephus, in mentioning him, calls him "John who is called the Baptist." John was strictly speaking a prophet; belonging to the legal dispensation; a rebuker of sin, and preacher of repentance. The expression in St. Luke, "the word of God came to John," is the usual formula for the divine commission of the Prophets (Jer. i. 1: Ezek. vi. 1; vii. 1, &c.). And the effect of the Holy Spirit on John was more in accordance with the O. T. than the N. T. inspiration; more of a sudden overpowering influence, as in the Prophets, than a gentle indwelling manifested through the individual character, as in the Apostles and Evangelists.-The baptism of John was of a deeper significance than that usual among the Jews in the case of proselytes, and formed an integral part of his divinely appointed office. It was emphatically the baptism of repentance (Luke iii. 3), but not that of regeneration (Titus iii. 5). We find in Acts xviii. 24-26; xix. 1-7, accounts of persons who had received the baptism of John, who believed, and (in Apollos's case) taught accurately the things (i. e. facts) concerning the Lord; but required instruction (in doctrine), and rebaptizing in the name of the Lord Jesus. Whether the baptism practised by the disciples before the Resurrection was of the same kind, and required this renewal, is uncertain. The fact of our Lord Himself having received baptism from John, is decisive against the k way in the three often: but Gospels, neither verb nor substan tive are used by St. John. k ISA. xl. 3. in the wilderness of Judæa, 2 and saying, 'Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. 3 For this is he that was spoken of by the prophet Esaias, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the of the Lord, make his paths straight. And the same John had his raiment of camel's hair, and a leathern 12 Kings 1. 8. girdle about his loins; and his meat was locusts and wild honey. 5 Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judæa, and all the region round about Jordan, 6 and were bap identity of the two rites, as also against the idea derived from Acts xix. 4, that John used the formula "I baptize thee in the name of Him who is to come." His whole mission was calculated, in accordance with the office of the law, which gives the knowledge of sin (Rom. iii. 20), to bring men's minds into that state in which the Redeemer invites them (ch. xi. 28), as weary and heavy laden, to come to Him. in the wilderness] Where also he had been brought up, Luke i. 80. This tract was not strictly a desert, but thinly peopled, and abounding in pastures for flocks. This wilderness answers to "all the country round about Jordan" in Luke iii. 3. See note on ch. iv. 1. 2. Repent] Used by the Baptist in the O. T. sense of turning to God as His people, from the spiritual idolatry and typical adultery in which the faithless among the Jews were involved. This, of course, included personal amendment in individuals. See Luke iii. 10-14. Josephus describes John as " commanding the Jews to practise virtue, and justice to their neighbour, and piety towards God, and thus to receive his baptism." the kingdom of heaven] An expression peculiar in the N. T. to St. Matthew. The more usual one is "the Kingdom of God" but "the Kingdom of heaven" is common in the Rabbinical writers, who do not however, except in one or two places, mean by it the reign of the Messiah, but the Jewish religion-the theocracy. Still, from the use of it by St. Matthew here, and in ch. iv. 17, x. 7, we may conclude that it was used by the Jews, and understood, to mean the advent of the Christ, probably from the prophecy in Dan. ii. 44; vii. 13, 14, 27. 3. For this is he] Not the words of the Baptist, meaning "for I am he," as in John i. 23, but of the Evangelist; and "is" is not for "was," but is the prophetic present, representing to us the place which the Baptist fills in the divine purposes. Of for, Bengel says well, that it gives the cause why John then came forward, as described in ver. 1, 2, viz. because it had been thus predicted. -The primary and literal application of this prophecy to the return from captivity is very doubtful. If it ever had such an application, we may safely say that its predictions were so imperfectly and sparingly fulfilled in that return, or any thing which followed it, that we are necessarily directed onward to its greater fulfilment the announcement of the kingdom of Christ. Euthymius remarks, that the ways and paths of the Lord are men's souls, which must be cleared of the thorns of passion and the stones of sin, and thus made straight and level for His approach. 4. And the same John] rather, now John himself, recalling the reader from the prophetic testimony, to the person of John. As John was the Elias of prophecy, so we find in his outward attire a striking similarity to Elias, who was "an hairy man, and girt with a girdle of leather about his loins." 2 Kings i. 8. The garment of camel's hair was not the camel's skin with the hair on, which would be too heavy to wear, but raiment woven of camel's hair. From Zech. xiii. 4, it seems that such a dress was known as the prophetic garb : 'neither shall they (the prophets) wear a rough garment to deceive.' There is no difficulty here. The locust, permitted to be eaten, Levit. xi. 22, was used as food by the lower orders in Judæa, and mentioned by Strabo and Pliny as eaten by the Ethiopians, and by many other authors, as articles of food. Jerome mentions it as the custom in the East and Libya: and Shaw found locusts eaten by the Moors in Barbary. (Travels, p. 164.) locusts] wild honey] See 1 Sam. xiv. 25. Here again there is no need to suppose any thing else meant but honey made by wild bees. Schulz found such honey in this very wilderness in our own time. See Psalm Ixxxi. 16: Judg. xiv. 8: Deut. xxxii. 13. 5.] all the region round about Jordan means all the neighbourhood of tized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins. 7 But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his mch. xii. 34: baptism, he said unto them, mOn generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come? 8 Bring ■ render, offspring. xxiii. 33. Jordan not included in Jerusalem and Judæa before mentioned. Parts of Peræa, Samaria, Galilee, and Gaulonitis come under this denomination.-There need be no surprise at such multitudes going out to John. The nature of his announcement, coupled with the prevalent expectation of the time, was enough to produce this effect. See, as strictly consistent with this account, chap. xi. .7-15. 6. were baptized] When men were admitted as proselytes, three rites were performedcircumcision, baptism, and oblation; when women, two-baptism and oblation. The baptism was administered in the day-time, by immersion of the whole person; and while standing in the water the proselyte was instructed in certain portions of the law. The whole families of proselytes, including infants, were baptized. It is most probable that John's baptism in outward form resembled that of proselytes. See above, on ver. 1. Some deny that the proselyte baptism was in use before the time of John: but the contrary has been generally supposed, and maintained. Indeed the baptism or lustration of a proselyte on admission would follow, as a matter of course, by analogy from the constant legal practice of lustration after all uncleannesses and it is difficult to imagine a time when it would not be in use. Besides, it is highly improbable that the Jews should have borrowed the rite from the Christians, or the Jewish hierarchy from John. confessing their sins] From the form and expression, this does not seem to have been merely shewing a contrite spirit,' 'confessing themselves sinners,' but a particular and individual confession; not, however, made privately to John, but before the people: see his exhortation to the various classes in Luke iii. 10-15 nor in every case, but in those which required it. 7. Pharisees and Sadducees] These two sects, according to Josephus, Antt. xiii. 5. 9, originated at the same period, under Jonathan the High Priest (B.c. 159-144). The PHARISEES, deriving their name probably from Parash," he separated,' took for their distinctive practice the strict observance of the law and all its requirements, written and oral. They had great power over the people, and are numbered by Josephus, as being, about the time of the death of Herod the Great, above 6000. We find in the Gospels the Pharisees the most constant opponents of our Lord, and His discourses frequently directed against them. The character of the sect as a whole was hypocrisy; the outside acknowledgment and honouring of God and his law, but inward and practical denial of Him; which rendered them the enemies of the simplicity and genuineness which characterized our Lord's teaching. Still, among them were undoubtedly pious and worthy men, honourably distinguished from the mass of the sect; John iii. 1: Acts v. 34. The various points of their religious and moral belief will be treated of as they occur in the text of the Gospels. The SADDUCEES are said to have derived their name from one Sadok, about the time of Alexander the Great (B.c. 323): but they were named from the Hebrew Tsaddik, righteousness, more probably. They rejected all tradition, but did not, as some have supposed, confine their canon of Scripture to the Pentateuch. The denial of a future state does not appear to have been an original tenet of Sadduceism, but to have sprung from its abuse. The particular side of religionism represented by the Sadducees was bare literal moral conformity, without any higher views or hopes. They thus escaped the dangers of tradition, but fell into deadness and worldliness, and a denial of spiritual influence. While our Lord was on earth, this state of mind was very prevalent among the educated classes throughout the Roman empire; and most of the Jews of rank and station were Sadducees. -The two sects, mutually hostile, are found frequently in the Gospels united in opposition to our Lord (see ch. xvi. 1, 6, 11; xxii. 23, 34; also Acts iv. 1); the Pharisees representing hypocritical superstition; the Sadducees, carnal unbelief. come] It would appear here as if these Pharisees and Sadducees came with others, and because others did, without any worthy motive, and they were probably deterred by his rebuke from undergoing baptism at his hands. We know, from Luke vii. 30, that the Pharisees in general'were not baptized of him.' |