prayers to His God and Father! How often must He have climbed that steep hill "on which the city was built," to enjoy a view unsurpassed in extent or beauty by any in Palestine, and to reflect on the wondrous destinies of that land, and of the people to whom He had given it by covenant promise!

I have already sketched the history of the infant Saviour up to the time of the massacre of Bethlehem and the flight into Egypt. Before accompanying Him to His Galilean home, there are a few difficult points in the chronology which it may be well to explain. Every observant reader will see, on comparing the narratives of Matthew and Luke,

that they do not seem entirely to agree; and on comparing the common dates of our era with the ascertained facts of contemporary history, we cannot fail to discover still more startling discrepancies. I shall first endeavour to fix the date of Christ's birth. It is now, perhaps, impossible to determine the precise year; but there are sufficient data to enable us very closely to approximate to the truth. Our common chronology gives it as the year A.D. 1, which corresponds to the year of Rome (A.U.) 754. But we know that Jesus was born during the lifetime of Herod. Now it so happens that the time of Herod's death has been ascertained by astronomical calculation. Josephus tells us that

it occurred just before the Jewish Passover, and immediately after an eclipse of the moon. That eclipse took place on the night of March 12, A.U. 750; therefore Christ must have been born before that date. If we make allowance for the several events which occurred between the Nativity and the death of Herod, the former cannot be fixed later than the summer of A.U. 749 (or B.C. 5).

The next point to be determined is the date of the flight into Egypt, relatively to that of the Nativity. If this can be correctly ascertained, we can at once arrange the order of events. Matthew is here our only authority. He tells us that when the wise men came to Jerusalem asking for the newborn King, Herod first learned from the Jewish Rabbins the place of His birth, and then tried to discover from the Magi the time. "Having called the wise men, he inquired accurately the time of the star which was appearing" (Matt. ii. 7). And afterwards, on discovering that the Magi had not done his bidding, he sent and slew all the children in Bethlehem, "from two years old and under, according to the time he had accurately inquired of the wise men." This period of "two years" must

not be taken as precisely indicating the age of Jesus. The jealous monarch would doubtless allow a considerable range before the date indicated, so as to make sure of his victim; but we are warranted in concluding from it that several months must have elapsed between the birth of Jesus and the massacre of the infants. The latter event probably occurred toward the close of A.U. 749.

In turning to the narrative of Luke, we find that he omits the account of the Magi, the massacre, and the flight into Egypt; while he relates other incidents not recorded by Matthew. There is no contradiction in this. The two historians had different purposes to serve, different nationalities to instruct and convince, and they were guided by the Holy Spirit in the selection of such events as should best advance their objects. The order of the events given by each evangelist is the only point of difficulty. There can be no doubt as to the time when the shepherds saw the vision and proceeded to Bethlehem; it was immediately after the nativity (Luke ii. 11, 12). The circumcision of Jesus is also definitely fixed at eight days after the birth (Luke ii. 21). The date of the presenta

tion in the temple is likewise determined. A comparison of Luke ii. 22 with Levit. xii. 1-8, proves that it occurred when the babe was forty days old. After the account of the presentation in the temple, Luke says, "And when they had performed all things according to the law of the Lord, they returned into Galilee, to their own city Nazareth" (Luke ii. 39). From this one would at first infer that Joseph and Mary returned from Jerusalem to Nazareth direct. It would be, however, only an inference. The evangelist does not say so. In a condensed narrative like his, where, as we know, only some of the leading events are given, a considerable interval may have occurred between the presentation in the temple and the journey to Nazareth. A comparison of this gospel with that of Matthew, proves that such an interval did occur; and that during it the visit of the Magi | and the flight to Egypt took place. Some writers have placed these events before the presentation in the temple. This I hold to be impossible, for three reasons:-1. It does not leave sufficient time for the long journey to Egypt-the nearest part of which could not have been reached, under the circumstances, in less than eight days,-for the residence there (Matt. ii. 15, 19), and for the return to Jerusalem. 2. It is opposed to the statements, that Herod inquired regarding the time of the star's appearing, and afterwards murdered all the children in Bethlehem "from two years old and under, according to the time which he had accurately ascertained of the wise men." 3. It is at variance with the narrative in Matthew ii. 19-22. Joseph, having been informed in a dream of the death of Herod, leaves Egypt; 'But when he heard that Archelaus did reign in Judea, he was afraid to go thither, and he turned aside into the parts of Galilee, and came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth." How could these statements be reconciled with the hypothesis of Jesus' return from Egypt to Jerusalem, his public presentation in the temple, and the public adoration of Simeon and Anna?

From the foregoing remarks, and from other calculations, to which I need not here refer, I think the chronology of the events related by Matthew and Luke may be stated as follows:

The Annunciation, and the first appearance of
the "Star in the East"-summer, A.U., 748
The birth of Jesus-spring,
749

Visit of the "Wise Men," flight to Egypt,
and massacre of the infants-winter,
Death of Herod-March,

749

750

Return from Egypt to Nazareth-spring, 750 There was no settled or valid tradition in the early Church regarding the date or season of Christ's birth. About the beginning of the fourth century, the 6th of January was celebrated in the East as the festival of the Nativity. In the middle of the same century, the Western Church began to observe the 25th of December. The present Christian era was fixed in the sixth century; and the first historian who used it was the venerable Bede. We thus see that there is nothing either in his tory or tradition to militate against the preceding dates.

It is singular to note the use which God has made of Egypt at various periods. On three oc

casions it has served as an asylum for His elect, Abraham retired there during a famine; his whole descendants found a home and support there for three centuries; and the Messiah-the hope and glory of Israel-found a refuge there from the murderous designs of Herod. The Jewish nation, in its wondrous history, was a type of Christ. The application of Hosea's words to His return from Egypt was thus beautifully appropriate"Out of Egypt have I called my son" (Matt. ii. 15). Israel, as a nation, was God's " son-His first-born" (Exod. iv. 22; Jer. xxxi. 9); Jesus, in a far higher sense, was also "the Son of God." The application of this, and many other similar passages to the Saviour, proves the almost universal reference of the prophetic writings of the Old Testament to the expected and promised Messiah. It would seem as if the glory of His person, and the nature of His offices, had been as fully before the minds of the prophets as they were before the evangelists. And it would seem that God, in his infinite mercy, so ordered it, that His saints in ancient times could, by faith, see as clearly the Saviour promised, as we can now see the Saviour given and crucified. It is now established by New Testament writers as an axiom of interpretation, that Christ in His person, or His offices, was the grand subject of all those dark allusions, and the grand substance of all those types and figures which fill the books of the Old Testament. A full Christology is, therefore, the best, and indeed the only key, to Old Testament mysteries. There is not, perhaps, a single event in the whole course of Christ's life on which the eye of prophecy had not been fixed ages before.

The infant Saviour was brought to Nazareth; and for well-nigh thirty years that little mountain village was His home. There had been nothing hitherto to distinguish Nazareth. History had altogether ignored it. Its inhabitants were poor; its situation was remote; its territory was bleak and barren. There was neither historic association nor natural beauty to entice a stranger to it, or to make a passing visitor linger among its grey hills. It appears, too, that it was even despised. Probably its poverty and insignificance had become proverbial. "Can there any good come out of Nazareth?" was the exclamation of Nathanael, when told of Jesus as the Messiah (John i. 46). Even this was in accordance with the Divine arrangement, and was a direct fulfilment of prophetic allusions. It all occurred "That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene" (Matt. ii. 23). The prophets, in their more direct predictions, always depicted the Messiah as poor and despised, entirely destitute of the outward attractions of pomp and splendour (Isa. liii. 2-7; Ps. xxii. 6, seq.) He was to be "as a root out of a dry ground." name Nazarene, applied to Him by the Jews, exactly expressed what the prophets had foretold. During His whole public life, the "Nazarene" was a constant mark for the scorn and contempt of learned scribes and haughty Pharisees. His humble origin, and provincial home, were the themes of unceasing ridicule. His disciples inherited the name and its accompanying reproach; and to this day Christians are called " Nazarenes" in Syria,

The

and no epithet is considered more degrading by the proud Moslem, except that of "Jew."

With the exception of one solitary incident, we have no record of these thirty years of Jesus' life. There are some most instructive lessons to be learned from the "silence of Scripture." We learn from it firstly and chiefly that the Bible is not man's book. The very facts and details which man would consider it necessary first to relate are never found there. There is no pandering there to a morbid curiosity. There is no attempt to gratify the natural craving for gossip or adventure. Such events alone are detailed as tend to illustrate Divine truth, or to demonstrate direct Divine agency. The historic facts of the Gospel are only given as the nails on which its glorious doctrines hang. No mere human author would have written in such a way. According to the bent of his mind, he would have given to the world either a popular or a profound memoir. To produce the former, he would have diligently collected the little anecdotes of Jesus' childhood, and detailed them in attractive language. He would have searched out, or imagined, the aspirations of opening manhood, and the manifestations of Divine power, and displays of Divine mercy and love, which characterized His mature years. All these a poet's skill and fancy would have woven together into an enchanting narrative. The philosophic historian would have found a different but not less enticing field for the display of his talents. He would have attempted to show the development of human nature, body and mind, under circumstances never before exemplified. He would have tried to delineate Divinity first manifesting itself in infant humanity. He would have laboured to explain how He, who is the source of all power, and the fountain of all wisdom, yet "increased in wisdom and stature ;" and how He, who from eternity was the beloved of the Father, yet "increased in favour with God and Here would have been a noble subject for human genius to apprehend, and for human eloquence to portray. But the heavenly biographer | passes it all by. His object is not to gratify human curicaity, or to exhibit poetic genius, or to display philosophic depth. It is far higher and nobler; it is to set forth, plainly and powerfully, God's plan of salvation through a crucified Redeemer to perishing sinners. To accomplish this the details of Christ's private life were unnecessary. An account of them might even have tended to withdraw the mind from the facts and results of the closing tragedy. Therefore they are omitted: the Scriptures are silent.

man.

There is only one incident recorded of this period, but it is in the highest degree instructive. Joseph and Mary were accustomed to go up to Jerusalem year after year to the Passover. When Jesus attained the age of twelve years, He went up with them, because then, according to Jewish traditional law, He first began to incur legal obligation. This may be regarded as the commencement of the second great period in our Lord's earthly career. The first began at the Incarnation; and it was introduced by direct exercises of Divine wisdom and power, in announcing the Advent, and watching over the welfare of the new-born King. The second period is also introduced by a mani

festation of Divine power and wisdom, but in a different form. The Divinity before displayed around, is now developed in the person of Jesus. He leaves the side and tutelage of His earthly parent, and in spirit joins His Heavenly Father (Luke ii. 49). He boldly enters the temple, conscious that it is His own house. He joins the circle of the learned, conscious that He is Himself the Great Teacher. His sage remarks, and pointed, penetrating questions, soon make Him the observed of all observers. Never before had such wisdom been displayed by a boy. There was something higher there than mere human intellect. There was the wisdom of God manifesting itself in man's nature, to show that in that nature the holy law of the Lord could now be fully understood; and in the self-possessed dignity of that boy's bearing, the power of God was also manifesting itself, to show that as man had broken the law, man could now again perfectly fulfil it.

It is worthy of notice at this stage how Jesus ignores the idea of an earthly father, and acknowledges only His Father in Heaven. "Son," said Mary, when she found Him, “why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold, thy father and I have sought thee, sorrowing. And he said unto them, How is it that ye sought me? wist ye not that I must be about my Father's business?" (Luke ii. 48, 49.) From this time the name of Joseph altogether disappears from the Gospel. Here was the acknowledgment of an obligation more sacred than any which earthly relationship could create, to which all other duties must yield, and for the discharge of which all human ties must be severed. His "Father's business" must be done, though at the sacrifice of all besides. Thus Jesus, while He showed himself to be a "faithful High-priest," set before the world a perfect example of Christian devotedness. He showed that God's service must take precedence of everything. Pleasure must not entice us from it; the world must not wean us from it; mockery must not shame us from it; danger must not drive us from it; death must not appal us from it. Rather, a thousand times rather, let us climb the fagot pile, and put on the martyr's crown, in God's service, than ascend the steps of a throne, and assume the jewelled diadem, and reign over mighty nations, in the service of sin.

Jesus and His parents had gone up to the feast in a pilgrim caravan. The time came round for the caravan to return. Joseph and Mary set out with it; but Jesus lingered behind, engaged in His "Father's business." They did not miss him during the first day's march, for they supposed Him to have been in the company." But when evening came, and each family gathered round its own tent or bivouac, then His parents looked for Him in vain. "They sought him among their kinsfolk and acquaintance; and when they found him not, they turned back again to Jerusalem, seeking him" (Luke ii. 45).

How natural and intelligible does all this appear to one acquainted with the country and people of Palestine! On this very day (April 8) four years ago, I set out from Nazareth with a pilgrim_caravan, on its way to Jerusalem to the feast. I saw there just such a scene as Jesus witnessed. aspect of the pilgrims, their costume, their mode

The