Julian Pe- 22 Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled Nazareth. which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet", saying,

riod, 4709.

Before Valgar Æra, 5.

23 Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.

24 Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife :

25 And knew her not sill she had brought forth her first-born son: and he called his name JESUS.

The name Jesus, say Castalio and Osiander, Heb. лwn, may possibly signify "the man Jehovah," or Jehovah incarnate, God in human nature. It is compounded of and w: the letter w, being interposed from the latter word, the two others and * being rejected as serviles, and therefore added or rejected at pleasure. This name is given at full length by Moses to the Jehovah Angel who conducted the Israelites through the wilderness, "The Lord is a man of war" nonba . The same name is given likewise at length in the exclamation of Eve, in which she expressed a hope that her son was the promised de

.קניתי איש את יהוה liverer

The angel commands that the name Jesus be given to the Messiah, because he shall save his people from their sins. The Angel Jehovah led his people through the wilderness, and saved them from their enemies, and from the hands of all who hated them. Christ was to do the same. The analogy between the enemies of Israel, and the enemies of the soul of man, is complete. Christ in the former instance was the Saviour of his people from their temporal enemies. He was now to be revealed as their Saviour from their more dangerous and inveterate adversaries Death, Satan, and the evil of their own nature. Pfeiffer is of opinion, with the generality of commentators, that the name must be derived from yw, to save, and he rejects therefore the above derivation, which is given with little variation from Osiander, Reuchlin, and Scbastianus Castalio. But see the whole Dissertatione de nomine Jesu-Pfeifferi dubia vexata, p. 1154, particularly Th. 6 to 18 inclusive.

I have placed the appearance of the angel to Joseph after Mary's return from the house of Elizabeth, as she came back from Hebron before the birth of John, three months after the annunciation of the Messiah. On her arrival at her own house, when the proofs of her pregnancy became evident, the fears and suspicions of Joseph, we may justly suppose, to have been excited. Before that period, he could have no reasons for suspicion.-Lightfoot, vol. i. p. 421.

17 The Christian may believe that this passage refers to the Messiah on the authority of St. Matthew; and the Jew may likewise believe it, on the authority of the ancient targumists; who, with their countrymen in general, were accustomed to refer these expressions of their early prophets to the expected Messiah. To overthrow the force of the prediction, they have, however, in later days, made use of arguments which their ancestors would have disdained.-Vide Kidder's Demons. of Mess. p. iii. p. 90, &c. &c. &c.

Julian Period, 4709.

SECTION VIII.

Birth of Christ at Bethlehem.

LUKE ii. 1-7.

1 And it came to pass in those days, that there went Bethlehem. Before Vul- out a decree from Cæsar Augustus, that all the world gar Era, 5. should be taxed 18.

2 (And this taxing was first made" when Cyrenius was governor of Syria 20.)

18 Another proof was now to be afforded to the whole Jewish nation, that the time of the Messiah had arrived. The Father of the Patriarchs had long prophesied that the sceptre was never to depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh, the sent, the Messiah (a) come, (Gen. xlix. 10.) The people, though they had long been subjected to the Romans, had been hitherto more immediately under the controul of their high priests, and the family of Herod, who called himself a Jew, though he was of the race of Edom. They were now reduced to a mere province; they were commanded by a Heathen, a stranger and foreigner, to enroll their families in the public registers; to take the oath of fidelity, and probably to pay tribute to him as their sovereign and ruler (b). What could have been a stronger argument, and appeal to every individual Jew; that the sceptre had entirely departed; and that Shiloh was to be immediately expected; than this individual taxation, or badge of subjection.

(a) The Targum of Onkelos gives this interpretation-non recedet

-et scriba ex nepoti וספרא,faciens potentiam ex domo Juda עביד שולטן

+

bus ejus in æternum, donec veniat Messias and the Targum of Jona-
than, non cessabunt reges, et præsides ex domo Juda, et scribæ
docentes legem ex semine ejus, usque ad tempus, donec veniat Messias:
and the Jerusalem Targum gives the same interpretation. See also
a large number of authorities from the early Jewish writers, all
to the same effect, in Schoetgenius Hora Hebraicæ, vol. ii. p.
492, &c. On the Sceptre of Judah, see the dissertation of Schoet-
genius de Schiloh Dominatore, and a curious and most ingenious
dissertation by Bishop Warburton: who interprets the prophecy
-The Theocracy shall continue over the Jews, until Christ come
to take possession of his Father's kingdom.-Divine Legation,
vol. iv. p. 245-266. Quod nomen habet Messias? Qui sunt de
domo x R. Schila seu scholastici ejus, dixerunt w Schilo esse
nomen ejus: quia dicitur Gen. xlix. 10. Usquedum veniet Schilo.—
Meuschen N. T. ex Talmude, 30, and 902. See also Leslie's Case of
the Jews, Dublin, 1755, p. 6. (b) About this time Augustus, as is related
by Josephus, ordered the oath of fidelity to be taken to him, as the
superior and sovereign of the land. In that oath, Herod was considered
as secondary to the Emperor, and the people were not required to give
him their personal allegiance. It is possible that the enrolment ordered
by Angustus was the same as the dæоypapǹ of St. Luke. See the next

note.

19 The word porn must be construed in the sense of priority as to time; it bears this sense in some, though not many instances. It is much better thus to render the passage, than to adopt any conjectural emendation; whether pò rйs, with Whitby, or porn Tрò rйs, with Michaelis, which his translator so decidedly condemns; or than Mr. Benson's, which is very

E

Julian Pe

3 And all went to be taxed, every one into his own Bethlehem.

riod, 4709. city.

Before Vulgar Æra, 5.

4 And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judæa, unto the city of David, which is called Bethlehem: (because he was of the house and lineage of David :)

5 To be taxed with Mary his espoused wife, being great with child 21.

ingenious, but unsupported by the only authority which ought
to induce us to receive any alteration of the vulgate text of
the New Testament; the authority of manuscripts. It is cer-
tainly a very slight alteration, but it must be rejected, in the
absence of other proof.

He would read ἄυτη ἡ ἀπογραφὴ πρώτη ἐγένετο ἢ (απογραφὴ ἡ
ἐγένετο) ἡγεμονεύοντος τῆς, &c. &c. inserting only the single letter
ἢ, between ἐγένετο and ἡγεμονεύοντος—and thus render the pas-
sage-This taxing took place before that, which took place, when
Cyrenius was governor of Syria.

The suggestion of Mr. Benson, that the decree for the taxing, or aroypapn, of St. Luke, was the same as the taking the oath of allegiance to Augustus, mentioned by Josephus, is well supported; and if his hypothesis did not require an alteration of the sacred text, which is not warranted by the requisite authorities, might be received without hesitation. But see the next note on the solution of the difficulty in this verse.-Vide Benson's Chronology of the Life of Christ.

20 It has been asserted, that this verse contradicts some well supported facts in history. Cyrenius, it is said, was not Governor of Syria till eleven years after this enrolment. At the time of Christ's birth, Saturninus and Volumnius were Presidents of that country.

The following is the correct statement of the fact, according to the best authorities, who have carefully studied the subject. Herod, some few years before his death, had been misrepresented to Augustus. The Roman emperor, to punish his imputed crime, ordered that Judea should be reduced to a Roman province, and a register be taken of every person's age, dignity, employment, family, and office. When this decree was first promulgated Cyrenius was only a Roman senator, and collector of the imperial revenue. Its execution was postponed, through the influence of Nicholas of Damascus, who was sent by Herod to Rome, to vindicate his conduct to Augustus; and it was only carried into effect eleven years afterwards, when Cyronius had been advanced from the inferior dignity of collector of the public tribute, to the office of Governor of Syria.

The difficulty, therefore, respecting the words in the original
will disappear, when the passage is considered in reference to
this statement. Dr. Lardner, who is followed by Dr. Paley,
proposes a solution, which has now been generally adopted.

This was the first enrolment of Cyrenius, who, though a
Roman senator only, when it was decreed, was Governor of
Syria, and is known among the Jews by that title." When St.
Luke wrote the Gospel, Cyrenius was known by his latter title.
-Lardner's Works, 4to. p. 136, &c. Paley's Evidences, vol. ii.
p. 177. Hales's Anal. vol. ii. p. 705, &c.

"There does not appear to have been any necessity, from the
nature of the tax, for the personal attendance of Mary at Beth-
lehem. When we consider her situation, it is not improbable

Julian Period, 4709. Before Vulgar Æra, 5.

6 And so it was, that, while they were there, the days Bethlehem. were accomplished that she should be delivered.

7 And she brought forth her first-born son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn.

SECTION IX.

The Genealogies of Christ ".

MATT. i. 1.

The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of
David, the son of Abraham.

she might have been induced to have accompanied her husband
to insure his protection: and to preserve herself from the insult,
or contumely of her unbelieving neighbours, to which she might
have been already exposed. To avoid reproach, or derision,
she might have encountered fatigue and inconvenience. How-
ever this may be, it shews us the manner in which the pro-
phecies of the Old Testament were accomplished, by cir-
cumstances, apparently accidental. No mortal wisdom could
have foreseen the journey of Joseph to Bethlehem, and the
consequent fulfilment of that prediction of Micah, which
the Jews had long referred to, as an undoubted prophecy
of the birth place of Christ. When Herod called the Priests
together, to demand of them "Where Christ should be
born," they assured him it was at Bethlehem, from the pro-
phecy of Micah, (Mic. v. 2.) This authority, however satis-
factory to a Christian, is not, I have heard, sufficient for the
modern Jew, who is more inclined to depend on the testimony
of his antient Rabbis. I refer him to Joma, f. 10. 1. apud
Meuschen N. T. ex Talmude, p. 19. (in p. 28. it is only a
repetition of the same reference,) and the Targum on Micah,
KITED POT, ex te ante me prodibit Messias, ut faciat po-
tentiam super Israel apud Schotgen, vol. i. p. 3.

The apparent discrepancies between the Genealogies of
St. Matthew and St. Luke, contained in this section, have given
rise to much discussion. The enrolment ordered by Augustus
must have compelled every family to review their tables of
pedigree, which were always carefully preserved among the
Jews, with more than usual attention: we may justly therefore
conclude that if any error bad crept into the pedigree of Joseph
and Mary, it would then have been rectified. In addition to
this, we may observe, that St. Matthew and St. Luke published
their Gospels at a time when the general tables of pedigree were
still preserved, and when every genealogical table which pro-
fessed to trace the descent of one who claimed to be the ex-
pected Messiah, would be inspected with the most scrupulous
and jealous anxiety. Yet we do not read that any objection to
the accuracy of the Evangelists was raised by their cotempo-
raries. Satisfactory solutions of the apparent differences have
been given by Archbishop Newcome, Grotius, Whitby, South,
Julius Africanns, and others, as well as Lightfoot, whose opi-
nion on this point is generally the most approved and adopted.

LUKE iii. 23.—to the end.

being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,

This learned Divine supposes that St. Matthew wrote his Gospel more particularly for the Jews: and he proves Christ therefore to be their Messiah, the heir of the throne of David, by legal descent from Abraham and David. But St. Luke, addressing himself to the Gentiles, to whom the promise had been given before the Levitical Dispensation, proves the same Christ to be the predicted seed of the woman, the son of Adam, the son of God.

From perusing the various schemes of the theologians who have discussed this point, we may, however come to these general conclusions:

From Abraham to David the genealogies of St. Matthew and St. Luke coincide.

It is commonly agreed that Matthew gives the legal, and not the natural, pedigree of Joseph.

Matthew traces the descendants of David through Solomon to Jechonias; in whom the descendants of Solomon became extinct.

The legal successor of Jechonias was Salathiel; who was descended from David through his son Nathan.

Hence Salathiel appears in Matthew as the son of Jechonias; though he was really the son of Neri, as stated by Luke. Zorobabel had two sons, Abiud and Rhesa.

Whether the line of Abiud became extinct in Matthan is disputed.

It is agreed that from Eli upwards, in Luke's genealogy, the natural succession is given.

It is disputed whether Joseph was Eli's actual son, or his legal son, or his son-in-law.

According to Julius Africanus (apud Euseb.) Joseph was the actual son of Jacob, and the grandson of Matthan. An opinion adopted by Whitby.

According to Grotius, Joseph was the actual son of Eli, and the legal successor of Jacob. This makes Luke's genealogy, the natural pedigree of Joseph, throughout.

Lightfoot supposes that, Joseph was the son-in-law of Eli, his wife Mary being the daughter of Eli.

All seem to agree that both Joseph and Mary were lineally descended from Zorobabel.

Therefore from Zorobabel upwards their natural pedigrees, as given by Luke, coincide.

Whether the pedigree from Zorobabel downwards, in Luke, be that of Joseph or Mary, is uncertaiu.

Whether the pedigree in Matthew from Zorobabel downwards, be the real, or only the legal descent of Joseph, is uncertain.

Dr. Adam Clarke, in his Commentary, has devoted much attention to this subject, and his conclusions appear so satisfactory, that I shall here lay them before the reader.

1. Being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph. This same phrase is used by Herodotus, to signify one who was only reputed to be the son of a particular person, το υτου παῖς νομίζεται, he was supposed to be this man's son.

2. Much learned labour has been used to reconcile this genealogy with that of St. Matthew, chap. i. and there are several ways of doing it: the following, which appears to me to be the best, is also the most simple and easy.