1Olshausen, Paulus, Kuinöl.↑2Tholuck, s. 194 ff. Neander, s. 19.↑3Cassiodor. Variarum, 3, 52. Isidor. Orig. 5, 36.↑4To refer here to theMonumentum Ancyranum, which is said to record a census of the whole empire in the year of Rome 746 (Osiander, p. 95), is proof of the greatest carelessness. For he who examines this inscription will find mention only of three assessmentscensus civium Romanorum, which Suetonius designatescensus populi, and of which Dio Cassius speaks, at least of one of them, asἀπογραφὴ τῶν ἐν τῇ Ἰταλίᾳ κατοικούντων. See Ideler, Chronol. 2, s. 339.↑5In the authoritative citations in Suidas are the words taken from Luke,αὔτη ἡ ἀπογραφὴ πρώτη ἐγένετο.↑6Hoffmann, s. 231.↑7Joseph. Antiq. 17, 13, 2. B. j. 2, 7, 3.↑8Antiq. 17, 13, 5. 18, 1, 1. B. j. 2, 8, 1.↑9Paulus, exeg. Handb. 1, a, s. 171. Winer, bibl. Realwörterbuch.↑10Tacit. Annal. 1, 11. Sueton. Octav. 191. But if in this documentopes publicæ continebantur: quantum civium sociorumque in armis; quot classes, regna, provinciæ, tributa aut vectigalia, et necessitates ac largitiones: the number of troops and the sum which the Jewish prince had to furnish, might have been given without a Roman tax being levied in their land. For Judea in particular Augustus had before him the subsequent census made by Quirinus.↑11Ὅτι, πάλαι χρώμενος αὐτῷ φιλω, νῦν ὑπηκόῳ χρήσεται. Joseph. Antiq. 16, 9, 3. But the difference was adjusted long before the death of Herod. Antiq. 16, 10, 9.↑12Joseph. Ant. 17, 2, 4.παντὸς τοῦ Ἰουδαϊκοῦ βεβαιώσαντος δι’ ὅρκων ἣ μὴν εὐνοῆσαι Καίσαρι καὶ τοῖς βασιλέως πράγμασι. That this oath, far from being a humiliating measure for Herod, coincided with his interest, is proved by the zeal with which he punished the Pharisees who refused to take it.↑13Tholuck, s. 192 f. But the insurrection which theἀπογραφὴafter the depositions of Archelaus actually occasioned—a fact which outweighs all Tholuck’s surmises—proves it to have been the first Roman measure of the kind in Judea.↑14Antiq. 17, 9, 10, 1 ff. B. j. 2. 2. 2. His oppressions however had reference only to the fortresses and the treasures of Herod.↑15Antiq. 18, 1, 1.↑16Bell. jud. 2, 8, 1. 9. 1. Antiq. 17, 13, 5.↑17Kuinöl, Comm. in Luc. p. 320.↑18Winer.↑19Adv. Marcion. 4, 19.↑20Storr, opusc. acad. 3, s. 126 f.Süskind, vermischte Aufsätze, s. 63. Tholuck, s. 182 f.↑21Michaelis, Anm. z. d. St. und Einl. in d. N.T. 1, 71.↑22Münter, Stern der Weisen, s. 88.↑23Paulus. Wetstein.↑24Credner.↑25In Schmidt’sBibliothek für Kritik und Exegese, 3, 1. s. 124. See Kaiser, bibl. Theol. 1, s. 230; Ammon, Fortbildung, 1, s. 196; Credner, Einleitung, in d. N.T. 1, s. 155; De Wette, exeget. Handbuch.↑26Chap. 17. Compare Historia de nativ. Mariae et de infantiâ Servatoris, c. 13.↑27Fabricius, im Codex Apocryph. N.T. 1, s. 105, not. y.↑28Ambrosius and Jerome. See Gieseler, K. G. 1, s. 516.↑29Dial. c. Tryph. 78.↑30C. Cels. 1, 51.↑31Hess, Olshausen, Paulus.↑32Paulus.↑33Chap. 14.↑34Chap. 4 in Thilo, s. 69.↑35In seinem Versuch über die Wundergeschichten des N. T.See Gabler’sNeuestes theol. Journal, 7, 4, s. 411.↑36Exeg. Handb. s. 180 ff. As Paulus supposes an external natural phenomenon so Matthæi imagines a mental vision of angels. Synopse der vier Evangelien, s. 3.↑37Hebräische Mythologie, 2. Thl. s. 223 ff.↑38Recension von Bauer’s hebr. Mythologie in Gabler’s Journal für auserlesene theol. Literatur, 2, 1, s. 58 f.↑39Neuestes theol. Journal, 7, 4, s. 412 f.↑40In Luc. 2. in Suicer, 2, p. 789.↑41Servius ad Verg. Ecl. 10, 26.↑42Liban. progymn. p. 138, in Wetstein, s. 662.↑43Thus Cyrus, see Herod. 1, 110 ff. Romulus, see Livy, 1, 4.↑44Thilo, Codex Apocr. N. T. 1, s. 383 not.↑45Vid. Schöttgen, 2, s. 531.↑46Sota, 1, 48:Sapientes nostri perhibent, circa horam nativitatis Mosis totam domum repletam fuisse luce(Wetstein).↑47Ueber den Lukas, s. 29. f. With whom Neander and others now agree.—L. J. Ch. s. 21 f.↑48Comp. De Wette, Kritik der mosaischen Geschichte, s. 116; George, Mythus u. Sage, s. 33 f.↑49Gen. xxxvii. 11(LXX.):Ἐζήλωσαν δὲ οὐτὸν οἱ ἀδελφοὶ αὐτοῦ, ὁ δὲ πατὴρ αὐτοῦ διετήρησε τὸ ῥῆμα.—Schöttgen, horae, 1, 262.Luc. 2, 18 f.:καὶ πάντες οἱ ἀκούσαντες ἐθαύμασαν — — ἡ δὲ Μαριὰμ πάντα συνετήρει τὰ ῥήματα ταῦτα, συμβάλλουσα ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ αὐτῆς.2, 51:καὶ ἡ μήτηρ αὐτοῦ διετήρει πάντα τὰ ῥήματα ταῦτα ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ αὐτῆς.50See Introduction.↑51Perhaps as a precautionary measure to obviate objections on the part of the Jews. (Ammon, Fortbildung, 1, s. 217.)↑52Pirke R. Elieser, 33:Sex hominum nomina dicta sunt, antequam nascerentur: Isaaci nempe, Ismaëlis, Mosis, Salomonis, Josiæ et nomen regis Messiæ.Bereschith rabba, sect. 1, fol. 3, 3.—(Schöttgen, horae, 2, s. 436):Sex res prævenerunt creationem mundi: quædam ex illis creatæ sunt, nempe lex et thronus gloriæ; aliæ ascenderunt in cogitationem (Dei) ut crearentur, nimirum Patriarchæ, Israël, templum, et nomen Messiæ.↑53Comp. Schneckenburger, über den Ursprung des ersten kanonischen Evangeliums, s. 69 ff.↑54Joseph. B. J. vi. vi. 4: Tacit. Histor. v. 13; Sueton. Vespas. 4. All the extant allusions to the existence of such a hope at the era of Christ’s birth, relate only in an indeterminate manner to a ruler of the world. Virg. Eclog. 4; Sueton. Octav. 94.↑55In saying that it is inadmissible to suppose a divine intervention directly tending to countenance superstition, I refer to what is calledimmediateintervention. In the doctrine ofmediateintervention, which includes the co-operation of man, there is doubtless a mixture of truth and error. Neander confuses the two. L. J. Ch., s. 29.↑56Paulus and De Wette, exeg. Handb. in loc.↑57According to Hoffmann (p. 256), that he might control the assertion of the magi by inquiring of his own astrologers, whether they had seen the star at the same time. This is not merely unsupported by the text—it is in direct contradiction to it, for we are there told that Herod at once gave terrified credence to the magi.↑58Fritzsche, in loc. aptly says—comperto, quasi magos non ad se redituros statim scivisset, orti sideris tempore, etc.↑59K. Ch. L. Schmidt, exeg. Beiträge, 1, s. 150 f. Comp. Fritzsche and De Wette in loc.↑60Hoffman thinks that Herod shunned this measure as a breach of hospitality; yet this very Herod he represents as a monster of cruelty, and that justly, for the conduct attributed to the monarch in chap. ii. of Matthew is not unworthy of his heart, against which Neander superfluously argues (p. 30 f.), but of his head.↑61Schmidt, ut sup. p. 155 f.↑62Stark, Synops. bibl. exeg. in N. T., p. 62.↑63This was the opinion of some of the Fathers,e.g.Euseb. Demonstr. evang. 9, ap. Suicer, 1, s. 559; Joann. Damasc. de fide orthod. ii. 7.↑64Chrysostomus and others ap. Suicer, ut sup. and the Evang. infant. arab. c. vii.↑65See Kuinöl, Comm. in Matth., p. 23.↑66Vermischte Aufsätze, s. 8.↑67Bibl. Comm. in loc, Hoffmann, s. 261.↑68Schmidt, exeg. Beiträge, 1, 152 ff.↑69This is shown in opposition to Olshausen by Steudel in Bengel’s Archiv. vii. ii. 425 f. viii. iii. 487.↑70Schmidt, ut sup. p. 156.↑71Babylon. Sanhedr. f. cvii. 2, ap. Lightfoot, p. 207. Comp. Schöttgen, ii. p. 533. According to Josephus Antiq. xiii. xiii. 5, xiv. 2, they were Jews of each sex and of all ages, and chiefly Pharisees.↑72Joseph. B. J. i. xxx. 3. Comp. Antiq. xvii. iv. 1.↑73Macrob. Saturnal. ii. 4:Quum audisset (Augustus) inter pueros, quos in Syriâ Herodes rex Judæorum intra bimatum jussit interfici, filium quoque ejus occisum, ait: melius est, Herodis porcum (ὗν) esse quam filium (υἱόν).↑74Vid. Wetstein, Kuinöl, Olshausen in loc. Winer d. A. Herodes.↑75Fritzsche, Comm. in Matt., p. 93 f.↑76Chrysostom and others.↑77Vid. Gratz, Comm. zum Ev. Matth. 1, s. 115.↑78Kuinöl, ad Matth. p. 44 f.↑79Wetstein, in loc.↑80Schneckenburger, Beiträge zur Einleitung in das N. T., s. 42.↑81Gieseler, Studien und Kritiken, 1831, 3. Heft, s. 588 f. Fritzsche, s. 104. Comp. Hieron. ad Jesai. xi. 1.↑82For both these explanations, see Kuinöl, in loc.↑83Kepler, in various treatises; Münter, der Stern der Weisen; Ideler, Handbuch der mathemat. und technischen Chronologie, 2. Bd. s. 399 ff.↑84Olshausen, s. 67.↑85Paulus, ut sup. s. 202, 221.↑86Bengel’s Archiv. vii. ii. p. 424.↑87At a later period, it is true, this journey of Jesus was the occasion of calumnies from the Jews, but those were of an entirely different nature, as will be seen in the following chapter.↑88Ueber formelle oder genetische Erklärungsart der Wunder. In Henke’s Museum, 1, 3, 399 ff. Similar essays see in the Abhandlungen über die beiden ersten Kapitel des Matthäus u. Lukas, in Henke’s Magazin, 5, 1, 171 ff., and in Matthäi, Religionsgl. der Apostel, 2, s. 422 ff.↑89L. J. Ch., s. 29 ff.↑90Orig. c. Cels. i. 60. Auctor, op. imperf. in Matth. ap. Fabricius Pseudepigr. V. T., p. 807 ff.↑91Schmidt’s Bibliothek, 3, 1, s. 130.↑92In loc. Num. (Schöttgen, horæ, ii. p. 152):Multi Interpretati sunt hæc de Messiâ.↑93Justin,Hist. 37.↑94Sueton. Jul. Cæs. 88.↑95Jalkut Rubeni, f. xxxii. 3 (ap. Wetstein):quâ horâ natus est Abrahamus, pater noster, super quem sit pax, stetit quoddam sidus in oriente et deglutivit quatuor astra, quæ erant in quatuor cœli plagis. According to an Arabic writing entitled Maallem, this star, prognosticating the birth of Abraham, was seen by Nimrod in a dream. Fabric. Cod. pseudepigr. V. T. i. s. 345.↑96Testamentum XII. Patriarcharum, test. Levi, 18 (Fabric. Cod. pseud. V. T. p. 584 f.):καὶ ἀνατελεῖ ἄστρον αὐτοῦ(of the Messianicἱερεὺς καινὸς)ἐν οὐρανῷ,—φωτίζον φῶς γνώσεως κ.τ.λ.Pesikta Sotarta, f. xlviii. 1 (ap. Schöttgen, ii. p. 531):Et prodibit stella ab oriente, quæ est stella Messiæ, et in oriente versabitur dies X V. Comp. Sohar Genes. f. 74. Schöttgen, ii. 524, and some other passages which are pointed out by Ideler in the Handbuch der Chronologie, 2 Bd. s. 409, Anm. 1, and Bertholdt, Christologia Judæorum, § 14.↑97Compare with the passages cited Note 7. Protevang. Jac. cap. xxi.:εἴδομεν ἀστέρα παμμεγέθη, λάμψαντα ἐν τοῖς ἄστροις τοὺτοις καὶ ἀμβλύνοντα αὐτοὺς τοῦ φαίνειν. Still more exaggerated in Ignat. ep. ad Ephes. 19. See the collection of passages connected with this subject in Thilo, cod. apocr. i. p. 390 f.↑98Exeg. Beiträge, i. s. 159 ff.↑99Fritzsche in the paraphrase of chap. ii.Etiam stella, quam judaica disciplina sub Messiæ natale visum iri dicit, quo Jesus nascebatur tempore exorta est.↑100As inMatt. ii. 11it is said of the magiτροσήνενκαν αὐτῷ—χρυσὸν καὶ λίβανον: so inIsa. lx. 6(LXX.):ἥξουσί, φέροντες χρυσίον, καὶ λίβανον οἴσουσι. The third present is in Matt.σμύρνα, in Isa.λίθος τίμιος.↑101V. 1.und3:כִּי בָא אוֹרֵךְ וּכְבוֹד יהוָֹה עָלַיִךְ(LXX:Ἰερουσαλὴμ)קוּמִי אוֹרִי זָרָח:—וְהָלְכוּ גּוֹיִם לְאוֹרֵךְ וּמְלָכִים לְנֹגַהּ זָרְחֵךְ↑102Æneid, ii. 693 ff.↑103Wetstein, in loc.↑104Herod, i. 108 ff. Liv. i. 4.↑105Octav. 94:—ante paucos quam nasceretur menses prodigium Romæ factum publice, quo denuntiabatur, regem populi Romani naturam parturire. Senatum exterritum, censuisse, ne quis illo anno genitus educaretur. Eos, qui gravidas uxores haberent, quo ad se quisque spem traheret, curasse, ne Senatus consultum ad ærarium deferretur.↑106Bauer (über das Mythische in der früheren Lebensper. des Moses, in the n. Theol.[176]Journ. 13, 3) had already compared the marvellous deliverance of Moses with that of Cyrus and Romulus; the comparison of the infanticides was added by De Wette, Kritik der Mos. Geschichte, s. 176.↑107Joseph. Antiq. ii. ix. 2.↑108Jalkut Rubeni (cont. of the passage cited in Note 6):dixerunt sapientes Nimrodi: natus est Tharæ filius hâc ipsâ horâ, ex quo egressurus est populus, qui hæreditabit præsens et futurum seculum; si tibi placuerit, detur patri ipsius domus argento auroque plena, et occidat ipsum. Comp. the passage of the Arabic book quoted by Fabric. Cod. pseudepigr. ut sup.↑109Protev. Jacobi, c. xxii. f.↑110Ex. iv. 19, LXX:βάδιζε, ἄπελθε εἰς Αἴγυπτον, τεθνήκασι γὰρ πάντες οἱ ζητοῦντές σου τὴν ψυχὴν.Matt. ii. 20:ἐγερθεὶς—πορεύου εἰς γῆν Ἰσραήλ· τεθνήκασι γὰρ οἱ ζητοῦντες τὴν ψυχὴν τοῦ παιδίου.We may remark that the inappropriate use of the plural in the evangelical passage, can only be explained on the supposition of a reference to the passage in Exod. See Winer, N. T. Gramm. s. 149. Comp. alsoExod. iv. 20withMatt. ii. 14,21.↑111Vide e.g. Schöttgen, Horæ, ii. p. 209.↑112Theile, zurBiographieJesu, § 15, Anm. 9. Hoffmann, s. 269.↑113Comp. my Streitschriften, i. 1, s. 42 f.; George, s. 39.↑114Neander, L. J. Ch. s. 27.↑115Schleiermacher (Ueber den Lukas, s. 47), explains the narrative concerning the magi as a symbolical one; but he scorns to take into consideration the passages from the O. T. and other writings, which have a bearing on the subject, and by way of retribution, his exposition at one time rests in generalities, at another, takes a wrong path.↑116Lightfoot, Horæ, p. 202.↑117Schneckenburger, Ueber den Ursprung des ersten kanonischen Evangeliums, s. 69 ff.↑118Thus, e.g. Augustin de consensu evangelistarum, ii. 5. Storr, opusc. acad. iii. s. 96 ff. Süskind, inBengel’sArchiv. i. 1, s. 216 ff.↑119E.g. Hess, Geschichte Jesu, 1, s. 51 ff. Paulus, Olshausen, in loc.↑120Süskind, ut sup. s. 222.↑121The same difference as to the chronological relation of the two incidents exists between the two different texts of the apocryphal book: Historia de nativitate Mariæ et de inf. Serv., see Thilo, p. 385, not.↑122This incompatibility of the two narratives was perceived at an early period by some opponents of Christianity. Epiphanius names one Philosabbatius, together with Celsus and Porphyry (hæres. li. 8).↑123Neander, L. J. Ch. s. 33, Anm.↑124Schleiermacher, Ueber den Lukas, s. 47. Schneckenburger, ut sup.↑125Antiq. xiv. ix. 4, xv. i. 1 and x. 4.↑126The Evang.Nicodemi indeed calls him, c. xvi.ὁ μέγας διδάσκαλος, and the Protev. Jacobi, c. xxiv. makes him a priest or even high priest, vid. Varr. ap. Thilo Cod. Apocr. N. T. 1, s. 271, comp. 203.↑1271 Th. s. 205 ff.↑128Cap. vi.Viditque illum Simeon senex instar columnæ lucis refulgentem, cum Domina Maria virgo, mater ejus, ulnis suis eum gestaret,—et circumdabant eum angeli instar circuli, celebrantes illum, etc. Ap. Thilo, p. 71.↑129Thus E. F. in the treatise, on the two first chapters ofMatth.andLuke.In Henke’s Mag. 5 bd. s. 169 f. A similar half measure is in Matthäi, Synopse der 4 Evan. s. 3, 5 f.↑130With the words of Simeon addressed to Mary:καὶ σοῦ δὲ αὐτῆς τὴν ψυχὲν διελεύσεται ῥομφαία(v. 35) comp. the words in the messianic psalm of sorrow,xxii. 21:ῥῦσαι ἀπὸ ῥομφαίας τὴν ψυχέν μου.↑131Schleiermacher, Ueber den Lukas, s. 37. Compare on the other hand the observations in § 18, with those of the authors there quoted, Note 19.↑132Neander here (s. 24 f.) mistakes the apocryphal for the mythical, as he had before done the poetical.↑133Olshausen, bibl. Comm. 1. s. 142 f.↑134Dial. c. Trypho, 78: Joseph came from Nazareth,where he lived, to Bethlehem,whence he was, to be enrolled,ἀνεληλύθει(Ἰωσὴφ)ἀπὸ Ναζαρὲτ, ἔνθα ὤκει, εἰς Βηθλεὲμ, ὅθεν ἦν, ἀπογράψασθαι. The wordsὅθεν ἦνmight however be understood as signifying merely the place of his tribe, especially if Justin’s addition be considered:For his race was of the tribe of Judah, which inhabits that land,ἀπο γὰρ τῆς κατοικούσης τὴν γῆν ἐκείνην φυλῆς Ἰούδα τὸ γένος ἦν.↑135Beiträge zur Einleit. in das N. T. 1. s. 217. Comp. Hoffmann, s. 238 f. 277 ff.↑136C. I. 8. 10.↑137Paulus, exeg. Handb. 1, a, s. 178.↑138Ueber die Unzulässigkeit der mythischen Auffassung u. s. f. 1, s. 101.↑139L. J. Ch. s. 33.↑140Tertull. adv. Marcion iv. 8. Epiphan. hær. xxix. 1.↑141Comp K. Ch. L. Schmidt, in Schmidt’s Bibliothek, 3, 1, s. 123 f.; Kaiser, bibl. Theol. 1, s. 230.↑142On this Heydenreich rests his defence, Ueber die Unzulässigkeit. 1. s. 99.↑143Ueber den Lukas, s. 49. There is a similar hesitation in Thelte, Biographie Jesu, § 15.↑144Ueber den Ursprung u. s. w., s. 68 f. u. s. 158.↑145Comp. Ammon. Fortbildung, 1, s. 194 ff.; De Wette, exeget. Handb. 1, 2, s. 24 f.; George, s. 84 ff. That different narrators may give different explanations of the same fact, and that these different explanations may afterwards be united in one book, is proved by many examples in the O. T. Thus in Genesis, three derivations are given of the name of Isaac; two of that of Jacob (xxv. 26.,xxvii. 16), and so of Edom and Beersheba (xxi. 31.,xxvi. 33). Comp. De Wette, Kritik der mos. Gesch., s. 110. 118 ff. and my Streitschriften, I, 1, s. 83 ff.↑
1Olshausen, Paulus, Kuinöl.↑2Tholuck, s. 194 ff. Neander, s. 19.↑3Cassiodor. Variarum, 3, 52. Isidor. Orig. 5, 36.↑4To refer here to theMonumentum Ancyranum, which is said to record a census of the whole empire in the year of Rome 746 (Osiander, p. 95), is proof of the greatest carelessness. For he who examines this inscription will find mention only of three assessmentscensus civium Romanorum, which Suetonius designatescensus populi, and of which Dio Cassius speaks, at least of one of them, asἀπογραφὴ τῶν ἐν τῇ Ἰταλίᾳ κατοικούντων. See Ideler, Chronol. 2, s. 339.↑5In the authoritative citations in Suidas are the words taken from Luke,αὔτη ἡ ἀπογραφὴ πρώτη ἐγένετο.↑6Hoffmann, s. 231.↑7Joseph. Antiq. 17, 13, 2. B. j. 2, 7, 3.↑8Antiq. 17, 13, 5. 18, 1, 1. B. j. 2, 8, 1.↑9Paulus, exeg. Handb. 1, a, s. 171. Winer, bibl. Realwörterbuch.↑10Tacit. Annal. 1, 11. Sueton. Octav. 191. But if in this documentopes publicæ continebantur: quantum civium sociorumque in armis; quot classes, regna, provinciæ, tributa aut vectigalia, et necessitates ac largitiones: the number of troops and the sum which the Jewish prince had to furnish, might have been given without a Roman tax being levied in their land. For Judea in particular Augustus had before him the subsequent census made by Quirinus.↑11Ὅτι, πάλαι χρώμενος αὐτῷ φιλω, νῦν ὑπηκόῳ χρήσεται. Joseph. Antiq. 16, 9, 3. But the difference was adjusted long before the death of Herod. Antiq. 16, 10, 9.↑12Joseph. Ant. 17, 2, 4.παντὸς τοῦ Ἰουδαϊκοῦ βεβαιώσαντος δι’ ὅρκων ἣ μὴν εὐνοῆσαι Καίσαρι καὶ τοῖς βασιλέως πράγμασι. That this oath, far from being a humiliating measure for Herod, coincided with his interest, is proved by the zeal with which he punished the Pharisees who refused to take it.↑13Tholuck, s. 192 f. But the insurrection which theἀπογραφὴafter the depositions of Archelaus actually occasioned—a fact which outweighs all Tholuck’s surmises—proves it to have been the first Roman measure of the kind in Judea.↑14Antiq. 17, 9, 10, 1 ff. B. j. 2. 2. 2. His oppressions however had reference only to the fortresses and the treasures of Herod.↑15Antiq. 18, 1, 1.↑16Bell. jud. 2, 8, 1. 9. 1. Antiq. 17, 13, 5.↑17Kuinöl, Comm. in Luc. p. 320.↑18Winer.↑19Adv. Marcion. 4, 19.↑20Storr, opusc. acad. 3, s. 126 f.Süskind, vermischte Aufsätze, s. 63. Tholuck, s. 182 f.↑21Michaelis, Anm. z. d. St. und Einl. in d. N.T. 1, 71.↑22Münter, Stern der Weisen, s. 88.↑23Paulus. Wetstein.↑24Credner.↑25In Schmidt’sBibliothek für Kritik und Exegese, 3, 1. s. 124. See Kaiser, bibl. Theol. 1, s. 230; Ammon, Fortbildung, 1, s. 196; Credner, Einleitung, in d. N.T. 1, s. 155; De Wette, exeget. Handbuch.↑26Chap. 17. Compare Historia de nativ. Mariae et de infantiâ Servatoris, c. 13.↑27Fabricius, im Codex Apocryph. N.T. 1, s. 105, not. y.↑28Ambrosius and Jerome. See Gieseler, K. G. 1, s. 516.↑29Dial. c. Tryph. 78.↑30C. Cels. 1, 51.↑31Hess, Olshausen, Paulus.↑32Paulus.↑33Chap. 14.↑34Chap. 4 in Thilo, s. 69.↑35In seinem Versuch über die Wundergeschichten des N. T.See Gabler’sNeuestes theol. Journal, 7, 4, s. 411.↑36Exeg. Handb. s. 180 ff. As Paulus supposes an external natural phenomenon so Matthæi imagines a mental vision of angels. Synopse der vier Evangelien, s. 3.↑37Hebräische Mythologie, 2. Thl. s. 223 ff.↑38Recension von Bauer’s hebr. Mythologie in Gabler’s Journal für auserlesene theol. Literatur, 2, 1, s. 58 f.↑39Neuestes theol. Journal, 7, 4, s. 412 f.↑40In Luc. 2. in Suicer, 2, p. 789.↑41Servius ad Verg. Ecl. 10, 26.↑42Liban. progymn. p. 138, in Wetstein, s. 662.↑43Thus Cyrus, see Herod. 1, 110 ff. Romulus, see Livy, 1, 4.↑44Thilo, Codex Apocr. N. T. 1, s. 383 not.↑45Vid. Schöttgen, 2, s. 531.↑46Sota, 1, 48:Sapientes nostri perhibent, circa horam nativitatis Mosis totam domum repletam fuisse luce(Wetstein).↑47Ueber den Lukas, s. 29. f. With whom Neander and others now agree.—L. J. Ch. s. 21 f.↑48Comp. De Wette, Kritik der mosaischen Geschichte, s. 116; George, Mythus u. Sage, s. 33 f.↑49Gen. xxxvii. 11(LXX.):Ἐζήλωσαν δὲ οὐτὸν οἱ ἀδελφοὶ αὐτοῦ, ὁ δὲ πατὴρ αὐτοῦ διετήρησε τὸ ῥῆμα.—Schöttgen, horae, 1, 262.Luc. 2, 18 f.:καὶ πάντες οἱ ἀκούσαντες ἐθαύμασαν — — ἡ δὲ Μαριὰμ πάντα συνετήρει τὰ ῥήματα ταῦτα, συμβάλλουσα ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ αὐτῆς.2, 51:καὶ ἡ μήτηρ αὐτοῦ διετήρει πάντα τὰ ῥήματα ταῦτα ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ αὐτῆς.50See Introduction.↑51Perhaps as a precautionary measure to obviate objections on the part of the Jews. (Ammon, Fortbildung, 1, s. 217.)↑52Pirke R. Elieser, 33:Sex hominum nomina dicta sunt, antequam nascerentur: Isaaci nempe, Ismaëlis, Mosis, Salomonis, Josiæ et nomen regis Messiæ.Bereschith rabba, sect. 1, fol. 3, 3.—(Schöttgen, horae, 2, s. 436):Sex res prævenerunt creationem mundi: quædam ex illis creatæ sunt, nempe lex et thronus gloriæ; aliæ ascenderunt in cogitationem (Dei) ut crearentur, nimirum Patriarchæ, Israël, templum, et nomen Messiæ.↑53Comp. Schneckenburger, über den Ursprung des ersten kanonischen Evangeliums, s. 69 ff.↑54Joseph. B. J. vi. vi. 4: Tacit. Histor. v. 13; Sueton. Vespas. 4. All the extant allusions to the existence of such a hope at the era of Christ’s birth, relate only in an indeterminate manner to a ruler of the world. Virg. Eclog. 4; Sueton. Octav. 94.↑55In saying that it is inadmissible to suppose a divine intervention directly tending to countenance superstition, I refer to what is calledimmediateintervention. In the doctrine ofmediateintervention, which includes the co-operation of man, there is doubtless a mixture of truth and error. Neander confuses the two. L. J. Ch., s. 29.↑56Paulus and De Wette, exeg. Handb. in loc.↑57According to Hoffmann (p. 256), that he might control the assertion of the magi by inquiring of his own astrologers, whether they had seen the star at the same time. This is not merely unsupported by the text—it is in direct contradiction to it, for we are there told that Herod at once gave terrified credence to the magi.↑58Fritzsche, in loc. aptly says—comperto, quasi magos non ad se redituros statim scivisset, orti sideris tempore, etc.↑59K. Ch. L. Schmidt, exeg. Beiträge, 1, s. 150 f. Comp. Fritzsche and De Wette in loc.↑60Hoffman thinks that Herod shunned this measure as a breach of hospitality; yet this very Herod he represents as a monster of cruelty, and that justly, for the conduct attributed to the monarch in chap. ii. of Matthew is not unworthy of his heart, against which Neander superfluously argues (p. 30 f.), but of his head.↑61Schmidt, ut sup. p. 155 f.↑62Stark, Synops. bibl. exeg. in N. T., p. 62.↑63This was the opinion of some of the Fathers,e.g.Euseb. Demonstr. evang. 9, ap. Suicer, 1, s. 559; Joann. Damasc. de fide orthod. ii. 7.↑64Chrysostomus and others ap. Suicer, ut sup. and the Evang. infant. arab. c. vii.↑65See Kuinöl, Comm. in Matth., p. 23.↑66Vermischte Aufsätze, s. 8.↑67Bibl. Comm. in loc, Hoffmann, s. 261.↑68Schmidt, exeg. Beiträge, 1, 152 ff.↑69This is shown in opposition to Olshausen by Steudel in Bengel’s Archiv. vii. ii. 425 f. viii. iii. 487.↑70Schmidt, ut sup. p. 156.↑71Babylon. Sanhedr. f. cvii. 2, ap. Lightfoot, p. 207. Comp. Schöttgen, ii. p. 533. According to Josephus Antiq. xiii. xiii. 5, xiv. 2, they were Jews of each sex and of all ages, and chiefly Pharisees.↑72Joseph. B. J. i. xxx. 3. Comp. Antiq. xvii. iv. 1.↑73Macrob. Saturnal. ii. 4:Quum audisset (Augustus) inter pueros, quos in Syriâ Herodes rex Judæorum intra bimatum jussit interfici, filium quoque ejus occisum, ait: melius est, Herodis porcum (ὗν) esse quam filium (υἱόν).↑74Vid. Wetstein, Kuinöl, Olshausen in loc. Winer d. A. Herodes.↑75Fritzsche, Comm. in Matt., p. 93 f.↑76Chrysostom and others.↑77Vid. Gratz, Comm. zum Ev. Matth. 1, s. 115.↑78Kuinöl, ad Matth. p. 44 f.↑79Wetstein, in loc.↑80Schneckenburger, Beiträge zur Einleitung in das N. T., s. 42.↑81Gieseler, Studien und Kritiken, 1831, 3. Heft, s. 588 f. Fritzsche, s. 104. Comp. Hieron. ad Jesai. xi. 1.↑82For both these explanations, see Kuinöl, in loc.↑83Kepler, in various treatises; Münter, der Stern der Weisen; Ideler, Handbuch der mathemat. und technischen Chronologie, 2. Bd. s. 399 ff.↑84Olshausen, s. 67.↑85Paulus, ut sup. s. 202, 221.↑86Bengel’s Archiv. vii. ii. p. 424.↑87At a later period, it is true, this journey of Jesus was the occasion of calumnies from the Jews, but those were of an entirely different nature, as will be seen in the following chapter.↑88Ueber formelle oder genetische Erklärungsart der Wunder. In Henke’s Museum, 1, 3, 399 ff. Similar essays see in the Abhandlungen über die beiden ersten Kapitel des Matthäus u. Lukas, in Henke’s Magazin, 5, 1, 171 ff., and in Matthäi, Religionsgl. der Apostel, 2, s. 422 ff.↑89L. J. Ch., s. 29 ff.↑90Orig. c. Cels. i. 60. Auctor, op. imperf. in Matth. ap. Fabricius Pseudepigr. V. T., p. 807 ff.↑91Schmidt’s Bibliothek, 3, 1, s. 130.↑92In loc. Num. (Schöttgen, horæ, ii. p. 152):Multi Interpretati sunt hæc de Messiâ.↑93Justin,Hist. 37.↑94Sueton. Jul. Cæs. 88.↑95Jalkut Rubeni, f. xxxii. 3 (ap. Wetstein):quâ horâ natus est Abrahamus, pater noster, super quem sit pax, stetit quoddam sidus in oriente et deglutivit quatuor astra, quæ erant in quatuor cœli plagis. According to an Arabic writing entitled Maallem, this star, prognosticating the birth of Abraham, was seen by Nimrod in a dream. Fabric. Cod. pseudepigr. V. T. i. s. 345.↑96Testamentum XII. Patriarcharum, test. Levi, 18 (Fabric. Cod. pseud. V. T. p. 584 f.):καὶ ἀνατελεῖ ἄστρον αὐτοῦ(of the Messianicἱερεὺς καινὸς)ἐν οὐρανῷ,—φωτίζον φῶς γνώσεως κ.τ.λ.Pesikta Sotarta, f. xlviii. 1 (ap. Schöttgen, ii. p. 531):Et prodibit stella ab oriente, quæ est stella Messiæ, et in oriente versabitur dies X V. Comp. Sohar Genes. f. 74. Schöttgen, ii. 524, and some other passages which are pointed out by Ideler in the Handbuch der Chronologie, 2 Bd. s. 409, Anm. 1, and Bertholdt, Christologia Judæorum, § 14.↑97Compare with the passages cited Note 7. Protevang. Jac. cap. xxi.:εἴδομεν ἀστέρα παμμεγέθη, λάμψαντα ἐν τοῖς ἄστροις τοὺτοις καὶ ἀμβλύνοντα αὐτοὺς τοῦ φαίνειν. Still more exaggerated in Ignat. ep. ad Ephes. 19. See the collection of passages connected with this subject in Thilo, cod. apocr. i. p. 390 f.↑98Exeg. Beiträge, i. s. 159 ff.↑99Fritzsche in the paraphrase of chap. ii.Etiam stella, quam judaica disciplina sub Messiæ natale visum iri dicit, quo Jesus nascebatur tempore exorta est.↑100As inMatt. ii. 11it is said of the magiτροσήνενκαν αὐτῷ—χρυσὸν καὶ λίβανον: so inIsa. lx. 6(LXX.):ἥξουσί, φέροντες χρυσίον, καὶ λίβανον οἴσουσι. The third present is in Matt.σμύρνα, in Isa.λίθος τίμιος.↑101V. 1.und3:כִּי בָא אוֹרֵךְ וּכְבוֹד יהוָֹה עָלַיִךְ(LXX:Ἰερουσαλὴμ)קוּמִי אוֹרִי זָרָח:—וְהָלְכוּ גּוֹיִם לְאוֹרֵךְ וּמְלָכִים לְנֹגַהּ זָרְחֵךְ↑102Æneid, ii. 693 ff.↑103Wetstein, in loc.↑104Herod, i. 108 ff. Liv. i. 4.↑105Octav. 94:—ante paucos quam nasceretur menses prodigium Romæ factum publice, quo denuntiabatur, regem populi Romani naturam parturire. Senatum exterritum, censuisse, ne quis illo anno genitus educaretur. Eos, qui gravidas uxores haberent, quo ad se quisque spem traheret, curasse, ne Senatus consultum ad ærarium deferretur.↑106Bauer (über das Mythische in der früheren Lebensper. des Moses, in the n. Theol.[176]Journ. 13, 3) had already compared the marvellous deliverance of Moses with that of Cyrus and Romulus; the comparison of the infanticides was added by De Wette, Kritik der Mos. Geschichte, s. 176.↑107Joseph. Antiq. ii. ix. 2.↑108Jalkut Rubeni (cont. of the passage cited in Note 6):dixerunt sapientes Nimrodi: natus est Tharæ filius hâc ipsâ horâ, ex quo egressurus est populus, qui hæreditabit præsens et futurum seculum; si tibi placuerit, detur patri ipsius domus argento auroque plena, et occidat ipsum. Comp. the passage of the Arabic book quoted by Fabric. Cod. pseudepigr. ut sup.↑109Protev. Jacobi, c. xxii. f.↑110Ex. iv. 19, LXX:βάδιζε, ἄπελθε εἰς Αἴγυπτον, τεθνήκασι γὰρ πάντες οἱ ζητοῦντές σου τὴν ψυχὴν.Matt. ii. 20:ἐγερθεὶς—πορεύου εἰς γῆν Ἰσραήλ· τεθνήκασι γὰρ οἱ ζητοῦντες τὴν ψυχὴν τοῦ παιδίου.We may remark that the inappropriate use of the plural in the evangelical passage, can only be explained on the supposition of a reference to the passage in Exod. See Winer, N. T. Gramm. s. 149. Comp. alsoExod. iv. 20withMatt. ii. 14,21.↑111Vide e.g. Schöttgen, Horæ, ii. p. 209.↑112Theile, zurBiographieJesu, § 15, Anm. 9. Hoffmann, s. 269.↑113Comp. my Streitschriften, i. 1, s. 42 f.; George, s. 39.↑114Neander, L. J. Ch. s. 27.↑115Schleiermacher (Ueber den Lukas, s. 47), explains the narrative concerning the magi as a symbolical one; but he scorns to take into consideration the passages from the O. T. and other writings, which have a bearing on the subject, and by way of retribution, his exposition at one time rests in generalities, at another, takes a wrong path.↑116Lightfoot, Horæ, p. 202.↑117Schneckenburger, Ueber den Ursprung des ersten kanonischen Evangeliums, s. 69 ff.↑118Thus, e.g. Augustin de consensu evangelistarum, ii. 5. Storr, opusc. acad. iii. s. 96 ff. Süskind, inBengel’sArchiv. i. 1, s. 216 ff.↑119E.g. Hess, Geschichte Jesu, 1, s. 51 ff. Paulus, Olshausen, in loc.↑120Süskind, ut sup. s. 222.↑121The same difference as to the chronological relation of the two incidents exists between the two different texts of the apocryphal book: Historia de nativitate Mariæ et de inf. Serv., see Thilo, p. 385, not.↑122This incompatibility of the two narratives was perceived at an early period by some opponents of Christianity. Epiphanius names one Philosabbatius, together with Celsus and Porphyry (hæres. li. 8).↑123Neander, L. J. Ch. s. 33, Anm.↑124Schleiermacher, Ueber den Lukas, s. 47. Schneckenburger, ut sup.↑125Antiq. xiv. ix. 4, xv. i. 1 and x. 4.↑126The Evang.Nicodemi indeed calls him, c. xvi.ὁ μέγας διδάσκαλος, and the Protev. Jacobi, c. xxiv. makes him a priest or even high priest, vid. Varr. ap. Thilo Cod. Apocr. N. T. 1, s. 271, comp. 203.↑1271 Th. s. 205 ff.↑128Cap. vi.Viditque illum Simeon senex instar columnæ lucis refulgentem, cum Domina Maria virgo, mater ejus, ulnis suis eum gestaret,—et circumdabant eum angeli instar circuli, celebrantes illum, etc. Ap. Thilo, p. 71.↑129Thus E. F. in the treatise, on the two first chapters ofMatth.andLuke.In Henke’s Mag. 5 bd. s. 169 f. A similar half measure is in Matthäi, Synopse der 4 Evan. s. 3, 5 f.↑130With the words of Simeon addressed to Mary:καὶ σοῦ δὲ αὐτῆς τὴν ψυχὲν διελεύσεται ῥομφαία(v. 35) comp. the words in the messianic psalm of sorrow,xxii. 21:ῥῦσαι ἀπὸ ῥομφαίας τὴν ψυχέν μου.↑131Schleiermacher, Ueber den Lukas, s. 37. Compare on the other hand the observations in § 18, with those of the authors there quoted, Note 19.↑132Neander here (s. 24 f.) mistakes the apocryphal for the mythical, as he had before done the poetical.↑133Olshausen, bibl. Comm. 1. s. 142 f.↑134Dial. c. Trypho, 78: Joseph came from Nazareth,where he lived, to Bethlehem,whence he was, to be enrolled,ἀνεληλύθει(Ἰωσὴφ)ἀπὸ Ναζαρὲτ, ἔνθα ὤκει, εἰς Βηθλεὲμ, ὅθεν ἦν, ἀπογράψασθαι. The wordsὅθεν ἦνmight however be understood as signifying merely the place of his tribe, especially if Justin’s addition be considered:For his race was of the tribe of Judah, which inhabits that land,ἀπο γὰρ τῆς κατοικούσης τὴν γῆν ἐκείνην φυλῆς Ἰούδα τὸ γένος ἦν.↑135Beiträge zur Einleit. in das N. T. 1. s. 217. Comp. Hoffmann, s. 238 f. 277 ff.↑136C. I. 8. 10.↑137Paulus, exeg. Handb. 1, a, s. 178.↑138Ueber die Unzulässigkeit der mythischen Auffassung u. s. f. 1, s. 101.↑139L. J. Ch. s. 33.↑140Tertull. adv. Marcion iv. 8. Epiphan. hær. xxix. 1.↑141Comp K. Ch. L. Schmidt, in Schmidt’s Bibliothek, 3, 1, s. 123 f.; Kaiser, bibl. Theol. 1, s. 230.↑142On this Heydenreich rests his defence, Ueber die Unzulässigkeit. 1. s. 99.↑143Ueber den Lukas, s. 49. There is a similar hesitation in Thelte, Biographie Jesu, § 15.↑144Ueber den Ursprung u. s. w., s. 68 f. u. s. 158.↑145Comp. Ammon. Fortbildung, 1, s. 194 ff.; De Wette, exeget. Handb. 1, 2, s. 24 f.; George, s. 84 ff. That different narrators may give different explanations of the same fact, and that these different explanations may afterwards be united in one book, is proved by many examples in the O. T. Thus in Genesis, three derivations are given of the name of Isaac; two of that of Jacob (xxv. 26.,xxvii. 16), and so of Edom and Beersheba (xxi. 31.,xxvi. 33). Comp. De Wette, Kritik der mos. Gesch., s. 110. 118 ff. and my Streitschriften, I, 1, s. 83 ff.↑
1Olshausen, Paulus, Kuinöl.↑2Tholuck, s. 194 ff. Neander, s. 19.↑3Cassiodor. Variarum, 3, 52. Isidor. Orig. 5, 36.↑4To refer here to theMonumentum Ancyranum, which is said to record a census of the whole empire in the year of Rome 746 (Osiander, p. 95), is proof of the greatest carelessness. For he who examines this inscription will find mention only of three assessmentscensus civium Romanorum, which Suetonius designatescensus populi, and of which Dio Cassius speaks, at least of one of them, asἀπογραφὴ τῶν ἐν τῇ Ἰταλίᾳ κατοικούντων. See Ideler, Chronol. 2, s. 339.↑5In the authoritative citations in Suidas are the words taken from Luke,αὔτη ἡ ἀπογραφὴ πρώτη ἐγένετο.↑6Hoffmann, s. 231.↑7Joseph. Antiq. 17, 13, 2. B. j. 2, 7, 3.↑8Antiq. 17, 13, 5. 18, 1, 1. B. j. 2, 8, 1.↑9Paulus, exeg. Handb. 1, a, s. 171. Winer, bibl. Realwörterbuch.↑10Tacit. Annal. 1, 11. Sueton. Octav. 191. But if in this documentopes publicæ continebantur: quantum civium sociorumque in armis; quot classes, regna, provinciæ, tributa aut vectigalia, et necessitates ac largitiones: the number of troops and the sum which the Jewish prince had to furnish, might have been given without a Roman tax being levied in their land. For Judea in particular Augustus had before him the subsequent census made by Quirinus.↑11Ὅτι, πάλαι χρώμενος αὐτῷ φιλω, νῦν ὑπηκόῳ χρήσεται. Joseph. Antiq. 16, 9, 3. But the difference was adjusted long before the death of Herod. Antiq. 16, 10, 9.↑12Joseph. Ant. 17, 2, 4.παντὸς τοῦ Ἰουδαϊκοῦ βεβαιώσαντος δι’ ὅρκων ἣ μὴν εὐνοῆσαι Καίσαρι καὶ τοῖς βασιλέως πράγμασι. That this oath, far from being a humiliating measure for Herod, coincided with his interest, is proved by the zeal with which he punished the Pharisees who refused to take it.↑13Tholuck, s. 192 f. But the insurrection which theἀπογραφὴafter the depositions of Archelaus actually occasioned—a fact which outweighs all Tholuck’s surmises—proves it to have been the first Roman measure of the kind in Judea.↑14Antiq. 17, 9, 10, 1 ff. B. j. 2. 2. 2. His oppressions however had reference only to the fortresses and the treasures of Herod.↑15Antiq. 18, 1, 1.↑16Bell. jud. 2, 8, 1. 9. 1. Antiq. 17, 13, 5.↑17Kuinöl, Comm. in Luc. p. 320.↑18Winer.↑19Adv. Marcion. 4, 19.↑20Storr, opusc. acad. 3, s. 126 f.Süskind, vermischte Aufsätze, s. 63. Tholuck, s. 182 f.↑21Michaelis, Anm. z. d. St. und Einl. in d. N.T. 1, 71.↑22Münter, Stern der Weisen, s. 88.↑23Paulus. Wetstein.↑24Credner.↑25In Schmidt’sBibliothek für Kritik und Exegese, 3, 1. s. 124. See Kaiser, bibl. Theol. 1, s. 230; Ammon, Fortbildung, 1, s. 196; Credner, Einleitung, in d. N.T. 1, s. 155; De Wette, exeget. Handbuch.↑26Chap. 17. Compare Historia de nativ. Mariae et de infantiâ Servatoris, c. 13.↑27Fabricius, im Codex Apocryph. N.T. 1, s. 105, not. y.↑28Ambrosius and Jerome. See Gieseler, K. G. 1, s. 516.↑29Dial. c. Tryph. 78.↑30C. Cels. 1, 51.↑31Hess, Olshausen, Paulus.↑32Paulus.↑33Chap. 14.↑34Chap. 4 in Thilo, s. 69.↑35In seinem Versuch über die Wundergeschichten des N. T.See Gabler’sNeuestes theol. Journal, 7, 4, s. 411.↑36Exeg. Handb. s. 180 ff. As Paulus supposes an external natural phenomenon so Matthæi imagines a mental vision of angels. Synopse der vier Evangelien, s. 3.↑37Hebräische Mythologie, 2. Thl. s. 223 ff.↑38Recension von Bauer’s hebr. Mythologie in Gabler’s Journal für auserlesene theol. Literatur, 2, 1, s. 58 f.↑39Neuestes theol. Journal, 7, 4, s. 412 f.↑40In Luc. 2. in Suicer, 2, p. 789.↑41Servius ad Verg. Ecl. 10, 26.↑42Liban. progymn. p. 138, in Wetstein, s. 662.↑43Thus Cyrus, see Herod. 1, 110 ff. Romulus, see Livy, 1, 4.↑44Thilo, Codex Apocr. N. T. 1, s. 383 not.↑45Vid. Schöttgen, 2, s. 531.↑46Sota, 1, 48:Sapientes nostri perhibent, circa horam nativitatis Mosis totam domum repletam fuisse luce(Wetstein).↑47Ueber den Lukas, s. 29. f. With whom Neander and others now agree.—L. J. Ch. s. 21 f.↑48Comp. De Wette, Kritik der mosaischen Geschichte, s. 116; George, Mythus u. Sage, s. 33 f.↑49Gen. xxxvii. 11(LXX.):Ἐζήλωσαν δὲ οὐτὸν οἱ ἀδελφοὶ αὐτοῦ, ὁ δὲ πατὴρ αὐτοῦ διετήρησε τὸ ῥῆμα.—Schöttgen, horae, 1, 262.Luc. 2, 18 f.:καὶ πάντες οἱ ἀκούσαντες ἐθαύμασαν — — ἡ δὲ Μαριὰμ πάντα συνετήρει τὰ ῥήματα ταῦτα, συμβάλλουσα ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ αὐτῆς.2, 51:καὶ ἡ μήτηρ αὐτοῦ διετήρει πάντα τὰ ῥήματα ταῦτα ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ αὐτῆς.50See Introduction.↑51Perhaps as a precautionary measure to obviate objections on the part of the Jews. (Ammon, Fortbildung, 1, s. 217.)↑52Pirke R. Elieser, 33:Sex hominum nomina dicta sunt, antequam nascerentur: Isaaci nempe, Ismaëlis, Mosis, Salomonis, Josiæ et nomen regis Messiæ.Bereschith rabba, sect. 1, fol. 3, 3.—(Schöttgen, horae, 2, s. 436):Sex res prævenerunt creationem mundi: quædam ex illis creatæ sunt, nempe lex et thronus gloriæ; aliæ ascenderunt in cogitationem (Dei) ut crearentur, nimirum Patriarchæ, Israël, templum, et nomen Messiæ.↑53Comp. Schneckenburger, über den Ursprung des ersten kanonischen Evangeliums, s. 69 ff.↑54Joseph. B. J. vi. vi. 4: Tacit. Histor. v. 13; Sueton. Vespas. 4. All the extant allusions to the existence of such a hope at the era of Christ’s birth, relate only in an indeterminate manner to a ruler of the world. Virg. Eclog. 4; Sueton. Octav. 94.↑55In saying that it is inadmissible to suppose a divine intervention directly tending to countenance superstition, I refer to what is calledimmediateintervention. In the doctrine ofmediateintervention, which includes the co-operation of man, there is doubtless a mixture of truth and error. Neander confuses the two. L. J. Ch., s. 29.↑56Paulus and De Wette, exeg. Handb. in loc.↑57According to Hoffmann (p. 256), that he might control the assertion of the magi by inquiring of his own astrologers, whether they had seen the star at the same time. This is not merely unsupported by the text—it is in direct contradiction to it, for we are there told that Herod at once gave terrified credence to the magi.↑58Fritzsche, in loc. aptly says—comperto, quasi magos non ad se redituros statim scivisset, orti sideris tempore, etc.↑59K. Ch. L. Schmidt, exeg. Beiträge, 1, s. 150 f. Comp. Fritzsche and De Wette in loc.↑60Hoffman thinks that Herod shunned this measure as a breach of hospitality; yet this very Herod he represents as a monster of cruelty, and that justly, for the conduct attributed to the monarch in chap. ii. of Matthew is not unworthy of his heart, against which Neander superfluously argues (p. 30 f.), but of his head.↑61Schmidt, ut sup. p. 155 f.↑62Stark, Synops. bibl. exeg. in N. T., p. 62.↑63This was the opinion of some of the Fathers,e.g.Euseb. Demonstr. evang. 9, ap. Suicer, 1, s. 559; Joann. Damasc. de fide orthod. ii. 7.↑64Chrysostomus and others ap. Suicer, ut sup. and the Evang. infant. arab. c. vii.↑65See Kuinöl, Comm. in Matth., p. 23.↑66Vermischte Aufsätze, s. 8.↑67Bibl. Comm. in loc, Hoffmann, s. 261.↑68Schmidt, exeg. Beiträge, 1, 152 ff.↑69This is shown in opposition to Olshausen by Steudel in Bengel’s Archiv. vii. ii. 425 f. viii. iii. 487.↑70Schmidt, ut sup. p. 156.↑71Babylon. Sanhedr. f. cvii. 2, ap. Lightfoot, p. 207. Comp. Schöttgen, ii. p. 533. According to Josephus Antiq. xiii. xiii. 5, xiv. 2, they were Jews of each sex and of all ages, and chiefly Pharisees.↑72Joseph. B. J. i. xxx. 3. Comp. Antiq. xvii. iv. 1.↑73Macrob. Saturnal. ii. 4:Quum audisset (Augustus) inter pueros, quos in Syriâ Herodes rex Judæorum intra bimatum jussit interfici, filium quoque ejus occisum, ait: melius est, Herodis porcum (ὗν) esse quam filium (υἱόν).↑74Vid. Wetstein, Kuinöl, Olshausen in loc. Winer d. A. Herodes.↑75Fritzsche, Comm. in Matt., p. 93 f.↑76Chrysostom and others.↑77Vid. Gratz, Comm. zum Ev. Matth. 1, s. 115.↑78Kuinöl, ad Matth. p. 44 f.↑79Wetstein, in loc.↑80Schneckenburger, Beiträge zur Einleitung in das N. T., s. 42.↑81Gieseler, Studien und Kritiken, 1831, 3. Heft, s. 588 f. Fritzsche, s. 104. Comp. Hieron. ad Jesai. xi. 1.↑82For both these explanations, see Kuinöl, in loc.↑83Kepler, in various treatises; Münter, der Stern der Weisen; Ideler, Handbuch der mathemat. und technischen Chronologie, 2. Bd. s. 399 ff.↑84Olshausen, s. 67.↑85Paulus, ut sup. s. 202, 221.↑86Bengel’s Archiv. vii. ii. p. 424.↑87At a later period, it is true, this journey of Jesus was the occasion of calumnies from the Jews, but those were of an entirely different nature, as will be seen in the following chapter.↑88Ueber formelle oder genetische Erklärungsart der Wunder. In Henke’s Museum, 1, 3, 399 ff. Similar essays see in the Abhandlungen über die beiden ersten Kapitel des Matthäus u. Lukas, in Henke’s Magazin, 5, 1, 171 ff., and in Matthäi, Religionsgl. der Apostel, 2, s. 422 ff.↑89L. J. Ch., s. 29 ff.↑90Orig. c. Cels. i. 60. Auctor, op. imperf. in Matth. ap. Fabricius Pseudepigr. V. T., p. 807 ff.↑91Schmidt’s Bibliothek, 3, 1, s. 130.↑92In loc. Num. (Schöttgen, horæ, ii. p. 152):Multi Interpretati sunt hæc de Messiâ.↑93Justin,Hist. 37.↑94Sueton. Jul. Cæs. 88.↑95Jalkut Rubeni, f. xxxii. 3 (ap. Wetstein):quâ horâ natus est Abrahamus, pater noster, super quem sit pax, stetit quoddam sidus in oriente et deglutivit quatuor astra, quæ erant in quatuor cœli plagis. According to an Arabic writing entitled Maallem, this star, prognosticating the birth of Abraham, was seen by Nimrod in a dream. Fabric. Cod. pseudepigr. V. T. i. s. 345.↑96Testamentum XII. Patriarcharum, test. Levi, 18 (Fabric. Cod. pseud. V. T. p. 584 f.):καὶ ἀνατελεῖ ἄστρον αὐτοῦ(of the Messianicἱερεὺς καινὸς)ἐν οὐρανῷ,—φωτίζον φῶς γνώσεως κ.τ.λ.Pesikta Sotarta, f. xlviii. 1 (ap. Schöttgen, ii. p. 531):Et prodibit stella ab oriente, quæ est stella Messiæ, et in oriente versabitur dies X V. Comp. Sohar Genes. f. 74. Schöttgen, ii. 524, and some other passages which are pointed out by Ideler in the Handbuch der Chronologie, 2 Bd. s. 409, Anm. 1, and Bertholdt, Christologia Judæorum, § 14.↑97Compare with the passages cited Note 7. Protevang. Jac. cap. xxi.:εἴδομεν ἀστέρα παμμεγέθη, λάμψαντα ἐν τοῖς ἄστροις τοὺτοις καὶ ἀμβλύνοντα αὐτοὺς τοῦ φαίνειν. Still more exaggerated in Ignat. ep. ad Ephes. 19. See the collection of passages connected with this subject in Thilo, cod. apocr. i. p. 390 f.↑98Exeg. Beiträge, i. s. 159 ff.↑99Fritzsche in the paraphrase of chap. ii.Etiam stella, quam judaica disciplina sub Messiæ natale visum iri dicit, quo Jesus nascebatur tempore exorta est.↑100As inMatt. ii. 11it is said of the magiτροσήνενκαν αὐτῷ—χρυσὸν καὶ λίβανον: so inIsa. lx. 6(LXX.):ἥξουσί, φέροντες χρυσίον, καὶ λίβανον οἴσουσι. The third present is in Matt.σμύρνα, in Isa.λίθος τίμιος.↑101V. 1.und3:כִּי בָא אוֹרֵךְ וּכְבוֹד יהוָֹה עָלַיִךְ(LXX:Ἰερουσαλὴμ)קוּמִי אוֹרִי זָרָח:—וְהָלְכוּ גּוֹיִם לְאוֹרֵךְ וּמְלָכִים לְנֹגַהּ זָרְחֵךְ↑102Æneid, ii. 693 ff.↑103Wetstein, in loc.↑104Herod, i. 108 ff. Liv. i. 4.↑105Octav. 94:—ante paucos quam nasceretur menses prodigium Romæ factum publice, quo denuntiabatur, regem populi Romani naturam parturire. Senatum exterritum, censuisse, ne quis illo anno genitus educaretur. Eos, qui gravidas uxores haberent, quo ad se quisque spem traheret, curasse, ne Senatus consultum ad ærarium deferretur.↑106Bauer (über das Mythische in der früheren Lebensper. des Moses, in the n. Theol.[176]Journ. 13, 3) had already compared the marvellous deliverance of Moses with that of Cyrus and Romulus; the comparison of the infanticides was added by De Wette, Kritik der Mos. Geschichte, s. 176.↑107Joseph. Antiq. ii. ix. 2.↑108Jalkut Rubeni (cont. of the passage cited in Note 6):dixerunt sapientes Nimrodi: natus est Tharæ filius hâc ipsâ horâ, ex quo egressurus est populus, qui hæreditabit præsens et futurum seculum; si tibi placuerit, detur patri ipsius domus argento auroque plena, et occidat ipsum. Comp. the passage of the Arabic book quoted by Fabric. Cod. pseudepigr. ut sup.↑109Protev. Jacobi, c. xxii. f.↑110Ex. iv. 19, LXX:βάδιζε, ἄπελθε εἰς Αἴγυπτον, τεθνήκασι γὰρ πάντες οἱ ζητοῦντές σου τὴν ψυχὴν.Matt. ii. 20:ἐγερθεὶς—πορεύου εἰς γῆν Ἰσραήλ· τεθνήκασι γὰρ οἱ ζητοῦντες τὴν ψυχὴν τοῦ παιδίου.We may remark that the inappropriate use of the plural in the evangelical passage, can only be explained on the supposition of a reference to the passage in Exod. See Winer, N. T. Gramm. s. 149. Comp. alsoExod. iv. 20withMatt. ii. 14,21.↑111Vide e.g. Schöttgen, Horæ, ii. p. 209.↑112Theile, zurBiographieJesu, § 15, Anm. 9. Hoffmann, s. 269.↑113Comp. my Streitschriften, i. 1, s. 42 f.; George, s. 39.↑114Neander, L. J. Ch. s. 27.↑115Schleiermacher (Ueber den Lukas, s. 47), explains the narrative concerning the magi as a symbolical one; but he scorns to take into consideration the passages from the O. T. and other writings, which have a bearing on the subject, and by way of retribution, his exposition at one time rests in generalities, at another, takes a wrong path.↑116Lightfoot, Horæ, p. 202.↑117Schneckenburger, Ueber den Ursprung des ersten kanonischen Evangeliums, s. 69 ff.↑118Thus, e.g. Augustin de consensu evangelistarum, ii. 5. Storr, opusc. acad. iii. s. 96 ff. Süskind, inBengel’sArchiv. i. 1, s. 216 ff.↑119E.g. Hess, Geschichte Jesu, 1, s. 51 ff. Paulus, Olshausen, in loc.↑120Süskind, ut sup. s. 222.↑121The same difference as to the chronological relation of the two incidents exists between the two different texts of the apocryphal book: Historia de nativitate Mariæ et de inf. Serv., see Thilo, p. 385, not.↑122This incompatibility of the two narratives was perceived at an early period by some opponents of Christianity. Epiphanius names one Philosabbatius, together with Celsus and Porphyry (hæres. li. 8).↑123Neander, L. J. Ch. s. 33, Anm.↑124Schleiermacher, Ueber den Lukas, s. 47. Schneckenburger, ut sup.↑125Antiq. xiv. ix. 4, xv. i. 1 and x. 4.↑126The Evang.Nicodemi indeed calls him, c. xvi.ὁ μέγας διδάσκαλος, and the Protev. Jacobi, c. xxiv. makes him a priest or even high priest, vid. Varr. ap. Thilo Cod. Apocr. N. T. 1, s. 271, comp. 203.↑1271 Th. s. 205 ff.↑128Cap. vi.Viditque illum Simeon senex instar columnæ lucis refulgentem, cum Domina Maria virgo, mater ejus, ulnis suis eum gestaret,—et circumdabant eum angeli instar circuli, celebrantes illum, etc. Ap. Thilo, p. 71.↑129Thus E. F. in the treatise, on the two first chapters ofMatth.andLuke.In Henke’s Mag. 5 bd. s. 169 f. A similar half measure is in Matthäi, Synopse der 4 Evan. s. 3, 5 f.↑130With the words of Simeon addressed to Mary:καὶ σοῦ δὲ αὐτῆς τὴν ψυχὲν διελεύσεται ῥομφαία(v. 35) comp. the words in the messianic psalm of sorrow,xxii. 21:ῥῦσαι ἀπὸ ῥομφαίας τὴν ψυχέν μου.↑131Schleiermacher, Ueber den Lukas, s. 37. Compare on the other hand the observations in § 18, with those of the authors there quoted, Note 19.↑132Neander here (s. 24 f.) mistakes the apocryphal for the mythical, as he had before done the poetical.↑133Olshausen, bibl. Comm. 1. s. 142 f.↑134Dial. c. Trypho, 78: Joseph came from Nazareth,where he lived, to Bethlehem,whence he was, to be enrolled,ἀνεληλύθει(Ἰωσὴφ)ἀπὸ Ναζαρὲτ, ἔνθα ὤκει, εἰς Βηθλεὲμ, ὅθεν ἦν, ἀπογράψασθαι. The wordsὅθεν ἦνmight however be understood as signifying merely the place of his tribe, especially if Justin’s addition be considered:For his race was of the tribe of Judah, which inhabits that land,ἀπο γὰρ τῆς κατοικούσης τὴν γῆν ἐκείνην φυλῆς Ἰούδα τὸ γένος ἦν.↑135Beiträge zur Einleit. in das N. T. 1. s. 217. Comp. Hoffmann, s. 238 f. 277 ff.↑136C. I. 8. 10.↑137Paulus, exeg. Handb. 1, a, s. 178.↑138Ueber die Unzulässigkeit der mythischen Auffassung u. s. f. 1, s. 101.↑139L. J. Ch. s. 33.↑140Tertull. adv. Marcion iv. 8. Epiphan. hær. xxix. 1.↑141Comp K. Ch. L. Schmidt, in Schmidt’s Bibliothek, 3, 1, s. 123 f.; Kaiser, bibl. Theol. 1, s. 230.↑142On this Heydenreich rests his defence, Ueber die Unzulässigkeit. 1. s. 99.↑143Ueber den Lukas, s. 49. There is a similar hesitation in Thelte, Biographie Jesu, § 15.↑144Ueber den Ursprung u. s. w., s. 68 f. u. s. 158.↑145Comp. Ammon. Fortbildung, 1, s. 194 ff.; De Wette, exeget. Handb. 1, 2, s. 24 f.; George, s. 84 ff. That different narrators may give different explanations of the same fact, and that these different explanations may afterwards be united in one book, is proved by many examples in the O. T. Thus in Genesis, three derivations are given of the name of Isaac; two of that of Jacob (xxv. 26.,xxvii. 16), and so of Edom and Beersheba (xxi. 31.,xxvi. 33). Comp. De Wette, Kritik der mos. Gesch., s. 110. 118 ff. and my Streitschriften, I, 1, s. 83 ff.↑
1Olshausen, Paulus, Kuinöl.↑2Tholuck, s. 194 ff. Neander, s. 19.↑3Cassiodor. Variarum, 3, 52. Isidor. Orig. 5, 36.↑4To refer here to theMonumentum Ancyranum, which is said to record a census of the whole empire in the year of Rome 746 (Osiander, p. 95), is proof of the greatest carelessness. For he who examines this inscription will find mention only of three assessmentscensus civium Romanorum, which Suetonius designatescensus populi, and of which Dio Cassius speaks, at least of one of them, asἀπογραφὴ τῶν ἐν τῇ Ἰταλίᾳ κατοικούντων. See Ideler, Chronol. 2, s. 339.↑5In the authoritative citations in Suidas are the words taken from Luke,αὔτη ἡ ἀπογραφὴ πρώτη ἐγένετο.↑6Hoffmann, s. 231.↑7Joseph. Antiq. 17, 13, 2. B. j. 2, 7, 3.↑8Antiq. 17, 13, 5. 18, 1, 1. B. j. 2, 8, 1.↑9Paulus, exeg. Handb. 1, a, s. 171. Winer, bibl. Realwörterbuch.↑10Tacit. Annal. 1, 11. Sueton. Octav. 191. But if in this documentopes publicæ continebantur: quantum civium sociorumque in armis; quot classes, regna, provinciæ, tributa aut vectigalia, et necessitates ac largitiones: the number of troops and the sum which the Jewish prince had to furnish, might have been given without a Roman tax being levied in their land. For Judea in particular Augustus had before him the subsequent census made by Quirinus.↑11Ὅτι, πάλαι χρώμενος αὐτῷ φιλω, νῦν ὑπηκόῳ χρήσεται. Joseph. Antiq. 16, 9, 3. But the difference was adjusted long before the death of Herod. Antiq. 16, 10, 9.↑12Joseph. Ant. 17, 2, 4.παντὸς τοῦ Ἰουδαϊκοῦ βεβαιώσαντος δι’ ὅρκων ἣ μὴν εὐνοῆσαι Καίσαρι καὶ τοῖς βασιλέως πράγμασι. That this oath, far from being a humiliating measure for Herod, coincided with his interest, is proved by the zeal with which he punished the Pharisees who refused to take it.↑13Tholuck, s. 192 f. But the insurrection which theἀπογραφὴafter the depositions of Archelaus actually occasioned—a fact which outweighs all Tholuck’s surmises—proves it to have been the first Roman measure of the kind in Judea.↑14Antiq. 17, 9, 10, 1 ff. B. j. 2. 2. 2. His oppressions however had reference only to the fortresses and the treasures of Herod.↑15Antiq. 18, 1, 1.↑16Bell. jud. 2, 8, 1. 9. 1. Antiq. 17, 13, 5.↑17Kuinöl, Comm. in Luc. p. 320.↑18Winer.↑19Adv. Marcion. 4, 19.↑20Storr, opusc. acad. 3, s. 126 f.Süskind, vermischte Aufsätze, s. 63. Tholuck, s. 182 f.↑21Michaelis, Anm. z. d. St. und Einl. in d. N.T. 1, 71.↑22Münter, Stern der Weisen, s. 88.↑23Paulus. Wetstein.↑24Credner.↑25In Schmidt’sBibliothek für Kritik und Exegese, 3, 1. s. 124. See Kaiser, bibl. Theol. 1, s. 230; Ammon, Fortbildung, 1, s. 196; Credner, Einleitung, in d. N.T. 1, s. 155; De Wette, exeget. Handbuch.↑26Chap. 17. Compare Historia de nativ. Mariae et de infantiâ Servatoris, c. 13.↑27Fabricius, im Codex Apocryph. N.T. 1, s. 105, not. y.↑28Ambrosius and Jerome. See Gieseler, K. G. 1, s. 516.↑29Dial. c. Tryph. 78.↑30C. Cels. 1, 51.↑31Hess, Olshausen, Paulus.↑32Paulus.↑33Chap. 14.↑34Chap. 4 in Thilo, s. 69.↑35In seinem Versuch über die Wundergeschichten des N. T.See Gabler’sNeuestes theol. Journal, 7, 4, s. 411.↑36Exeg. Handb. s. 180 ff. As Paulus supposes an external natural phenomenon so Matthæi imagines a mental vision of angels. Synopse der vier Evangelien, s. 3.↑37Hebräische Mythologie, 2. Thl. s. 223 ff.↑38Recension von Bauer’s hebr. Mythologie in Gabler’s Journal für auserlesene theol. Literatur, 2, 1, s. 58 f.↑39Neuestes theol. Journal, 7, 4, s. 412 f.↑40In Luc. 2. in Suicer, 2, p. 789.↑41Servius ad Verg. Ecl. 10, 26.↑42Liban. progymn. p. 138, in Wetstein, s. 662.↑43Thus Cyrus, see Herod. 1, 110 ff. Romulus, see Livy, 1, 4.↑44Thilo, Codex Apocr. N. T. 1, s. 383 not.↑45Vid. Schöttgen, 2, s. 531.↑46Sota, 1, 48:Sapientes nostri perhibent, circa horam nativitatis Mosis totam domum repletam fuisse luce(Wetstein).↑47Ueber den Lukas, s. 29. f. With whom Neander and others now agree.—L. J. Ch. s. 21 f.↑48Comp. De Wette, Kritik der mosaischen Geschichte, s. 116; George, Mythus u. Sage, s. 33 f.↑49Gen. xxxvii. 11(LXX.):Ἐζήλωσαν δὲ οὐτὸν οἱ ἀδελφοὶ αὐτοῦ, ὁ δὲ πατὴρ αὐτοῦ διετήρησε τὸ ῥῆμα.—Schöttgen, horae, 1, 262.Luc. 2, 18 f.:καὶ πάντες οἱ ἀκούσαντες ἐθαύμασαν — — ἡ δὲ Μαριὰμ πάντα συνετήρει τὰ ῥήματα ταῦτα, συμβάλλουσα ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ αὐτῆς.2, 51:καὶ ἡ μήτηρ αὐτοῦ διετήρει πάντα τὰ ῥήματα ταῦτα ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ αὐτῆς.50See Introduction.↑51Perhaps as a precautionary measure to obviate objections on the part of the Jews. (Ammon, Fortbildung, 1, s. 217.)↑52Pirke R. Elieser, 33:Sex hominum nomina dicta sunt, antequam nascerentur: Isaaci nempe, Ismaëlis, Mosis, Salomonis, Josiæ et nomen regis Messiæ.Bereschith rabba, sect. 1, fol. 3, 3.—(Schöttgen, horae, 2, s. 436):Sex res prævenerunt creationem mundi: quædam ex illis creatæ sunt, nempe lex et thronus gloriæ; aliæ ascenderunt in cogitationem (Dei) ut crearentur, nimirum Patriarchæ, Israël, templum, et nomen Messiæ.↑53Comp. Schneckenburger, über den Ursprung des ersten kanonischen Evangeliums, s. 69 ff.↑54Joseph. B. J. vi. vi. 4: Tacit. Histor. v. 13; Sueton. Vespas. 4. All the extant allusions to the existence of such a hope at the era of Christ’s birth, relate only in an indeterminate manner to a ruler of the world. Virg. Eclog. 4; Sueton. Octav. 94.↑55In saying that it is inadmissible to suppose a divine intervention directly tending to countenance superstition, I refer to what is calledimmediateintervention. In the doctrine ofmediateintervention, which includes the co-operation of man, there is doubtless a mixture of truth and error. Neander confuses the two. L. J. Ch., s. 29.↑56Paulus and De Wette, exeg. Handb. in loc.↑57According to Hoffmann (p. 256), that he might control the assertion of the magi by inquiring of his own astrologers, whether they had seen the star at the same time. This is not merely unsupported by the text—it is in direct contradiction to it, for we are there told that Herod at once gave terrified credence to the magi.↑58Fritzsche, in loc. aptly says—comperto, quasi magos non ad se redituros statim scivisset, orti sideris tempore, etc.↑59K. Ch. L. Schmidt, exeg. Beiträge, 1, s. 150 f. Comp. Fritzsche and De Wette in loc.↑60Hoffman thinks that Herod shunned this measure as a breach of hospitality; yet this very Herod he represents as a monster of cruelty, and that justly, for the conduct attributed to the monarch in chap. ii. of Matthew is not unworthy of his heart, against which Neander superfluously argues (p. 30 f.), but of his head.↑61Schmidt, ut sup. p. 155 f.↑62Stark, Synops. bibl. exeg. in N. T., p. 62.↑63This was the opinion of some of the Fathers,e.g.Euseb. Demonstr. evang. 9, ap. Suicer, 1, s. 559; Joann. Damasc. de fide orthod. ii. 7.↑64Chrysostomus and others ap. Suicer, ut sup. and the Evang. infant. arab. c. vii.↑65See Kuinöl, Comm. in Matth., p. 23.↑66Vermischte Aufsätze, s. 8.↑67Bibl. Comm. in loc, Hoffmann, s. 261.↑68Schmidt, exeg. Beiträge, 1, 152 ff.↑69This is shown in opposition to Olshausen by Steudel in Bengel’s Archiv. vii. ii. 425 f. viii. iii. 487.↑70Schmidt, ut sup. p. 156.↑71Babylon. Sanhedr. f. cvii. 2, ap. Lightfoot, p. 207. Comp. Schöttgen, ii. p. 533. According to Josephus Antiq. xiii. xiii. 5, xiv. 2, they were Jews of each sex and of all ages, and chiefly Pharisees.↑72Joseph. B. J. i. xxx. 3. Comp. Antiq. xvii. iv. 1.↑73Macrob. Saturnal. ii. 4:Quum audisset (Augustus) inter pueros, quos in Syriâ Herodes rex Judæorum intra bimatum jussit interfici, filium quoque ejus occisum, ait: melius est, Herodis porcum (ὗν) esse quam filium (υἱόν).↑74Vid. Wetstein, Kuinöl, Olshausen in loc. Winer d. A. Herodes.↑75Fritzsche, Comm. in Matt., p. 93 f.↑76Chrysostom and others.↑77Vid. Gratz, Comm. zum Ev. Matth. 1, s. 115.↑78Kuinöl, ad Matth. p. 44 f.↑79Wetstein, in loc.↑80Schneckenburger, Beiträge zur Einleitung in das N. T., s. 42.↑81Gieseler, Studien und Kritiken, 1831, 3. Heft, s. 588 f. Fritzsche, s. 104. Comp. Hieron. ad Jesai. xi. 1.↑82For both these explanations, see Kuinöl, in loc.↑83Kepler, in various treatises; Münter, der Stern der Weisen; Ideler, Handbuch der mathemat. und technischen Chronologie, 2. Bd. s. 399 ff.↑84Olshausen, s. 67.↑85Paulus, ut sup. s. 202, 221.↑86Bengel’s Archiv. vii. ii. p. 424.↑87At a later period, it is true, this journey of Jesus was the occasion of calumnies from the Jews, but those were of an entirely different nature, as will be seen in the following chapter.↑88Ueber formelle oder genetische Erklärungsart der Wunder. In Henke’s Museum, 1, 3, 399 ff. Similar essays see in the Abhandlungen über die beiden ersten Kapitel des Matthäus u. Lukas, in Henke’s Magazin, 5, 1, 171 ff., and in Matthäi, Religionsgl. der Apostel, 2, s. 422 ff.↑89L. J. Ch., s. 29 ff.↑90Orig. c. Cels. i. 60. Auctor, op. imperf. in Matth. ap. Fabricius Pseudepigr. V. T., p. 807 ff.↑91Schmidt’s Bibliothek, 3, 1, s. 130.↑92In loc. Num. (Schöttgen, horæ, ii. p. 152):Multi Interpretati sunt hæc de Messiâ.↑93Justin,Hist. 37.↑94Sueton. Jul. Cæs. 88.↑95Jalkut Rubeni, f. xxxii. 3 (ap. Wetstein):quâ horâ natus est Abrahamus, pater noster, super quem sit pax, stetit quoddam sidus in oriente et deglutivit quatuor astra, quæ erant in quatuor cœli plagis. According to an Arabic writing entitled Maallem, this star, prognosticating the birth of Abraham, was seen by Nimrod in a dream. Fabric. Cod. pseudepigr. V. T. i. s. 345.↑96Testamentum XII. Patriarcharum, test. Levi, 18 (Fabric. Cod. pseud. V. T. p. 584 f.):καὶ ἀνατελεῖ ἄστρον αὐτοῦ(of the Messianicἱερεὺς καινὸς)ἐν οὐρανῷ,—φωτίζον φῶς γνώσεως κ.τ.λ.Pesikta Sotarta, f. xlviii. 1 (ap. Schöttgen, ii. p. 531):Et prodibit stella ab oriente, quæ est stella Messiæ, et in oriente versabitur dies X V. Comp. Sohar Genes. f. 74. Schöttgen, ii. 524, and some other passages which are pointed out by Ideler in the Handbuch der Chronologie, 2 Bd. s. 409, Anm. 1, and Bertholdt, Christologia Judæorum, § 14.↑97Compare with the passages cited Note 7. Protevang. Jac. cap. xxi.:εἴδομεν ἀστέρα παμμεγέθη, λάμψαντα ἐν τοῖς ἄστροις τοὺτοις καὶ ἀμβλύνοντα αὐτοὺς τοῦ φαίνειν. Still more exaggerated in Ignat. ep. ad Ephes. 19. See the collection of passages connected with this subject in Thilo, cod. apocr. i. p. 390 f.↑98Exeg. Beiträge, i. s. 159 ff.↑99Fritzsche in the paraphrase of chap. ii.Etiam stella, quam judaica disciplina sub Messiæ natale visum iri dicit, quo Jesus nascebatur tempore exorta est.↑100As inMatt. ii. 11it is said of the magiτροσήνενκαν αὐτῷ—χρυσὸν καὶ λίβανον: so inIsa. lx. 6(LXX.):ἥξουσί, φέροντες χρυσίον, καὶ λίβανον οἴσουσι. The third present is in Matt.σμύρνα, in Isa.λίθος τίμιος.↑101V. 1.und3:כִּי בָא אוֹרֵךְ וּכְבוֹד יהוָֹה עָלַיִךְ(LXX:Ἰερουσαλὴμ)קוּמִי אוֹרִי זָרָח:—וְהָלְכוּ גּוֹיִם לְאוֹרֵךְ וּמְלָכִים לְנֹגַהּ זָרְחֵךְ↑102Æneid, ii. 693 ff.↑103Wetstein, in loc.↑104Herod, i. 108 ff. Liv. i. 4.↑105Octav. 94:—ante paucos quam nasceretur menses prodigium Romæ factum publice, quo denuntiabatur, regem populi Romani naturam parturire. Senatum exterritum, censuisse, ne quis illo anno genitus educaretur. Eos, qui gravidas uxores haberent, quo ad se quisque spem traheret, curasse, ne Senatus consultum ad ærarium deferretur.↑106Bauer (über das Mythische in der früheren Lebensper. des Moses, in the n. Theol.[176]Journ. 13, 3) had already compared the marvellous deliverance of Moses with that of Cyrus and Romulus; the comparison of the infanticides was added by De Wette, Kritik der Mos. Geschichte, s. 176.↑107Joseph. Antiq. ii. ix. 2.↑108Jalkut Rubeni (cont. of the passage cited in Note 6):dixerunt sapientes Nimrodi: natus est Tharæ filius hâc ipsâ horâ, ex quo egressurus est populus, qui hæreditabit præsens et futurum seculum; si tibi placuerit, detur patri ipsius domus argento auroque plena, et occidat ipsum. Comp. the passage of the Arabic book quoted by Fabric. Cod. pseudepigr. ut sup.↑109Protev. Jacobi, c. xxii. f.↑110Ex. iv. 19, LXX:βάδιζε, ἄπελθε εἰς Αἴγυπτον, τεθνήκασι γὰρ πάντες οἱ ζητοῦντές σου τὴν ψυχὴν.Matt. ii. 20:ἐγερθεὶς—πορεύου εἰς γῆν Ἰσραήλ· τεθνήκασι γὰρ οἱ ζητοῦντες τὴν ψυχὴν τοῦ παιδίου.We may remark that the inappropriate use of the plural in the evangelical passage, can only be explained on the supposition of a reference to the passage in Exod. See Winer, N. T. Gramm. s. 149. Comp. alsoExod. iv. 20withMatt. ii. 14,21.↑111Vide e.g. Schöttgen, Horæ, ii. p. 209.↑112Theile, zurBiographieJesu, § 15, Anm. 9. Hoffmann, s. 269.↑113Comp. my Streitschriften, i. 1, s. 42 f.; George, s. 39.↑114Neander, L. J. Ch. s. 27.↑115Schleiermacher (Ueber den Lukas, s. 47), explains the narrative concerning the magi as a symbolical one; but he scorns to take into consideration the passages from the O. T. and other writings, which have a bearing on the subject, and by way of retribution, his exposition at one time rests in generalities, at another, takes a wrong path.↑116Lightfoot, Horæ, p. 202.↑117Schneckenburger, Ueber den Ursprung des ersten kanonischen Evangeliums, s. 69 ff.↑118Thus, e.g. Augustin de consensu evangelistarum, ii. 5. Storr, opusc. acad. iii. s. 96 ff. Süskind, inBengel’sArchiv. i. 1, s. 216 ff.↑119E.g. Hess, Geschichte Jesu, 1, s. 51 ff. Paulus, Olshausen, in loc.↑120Süskind, ut sup. s. 222.↑121The same difference as to the chronological relation of the two incidents exists between the two different texts of the apocryphal book: Historia de nativitate Mariæ et de inf. Serv., see Thilo, p. 385, not.↑122This incompatibility of the two narratives was perceived at an early period by some opponents of Christianity. Epiphanius names one Philosabbatius, together with Celsus and Porphyry (hæres. li. 8).↑123Neander, L. J. Ch. s. 33, Anm.↑124Schleiermacher, Ueber den Lukas, s. 47. Schneckenburger, ut sup.↑125Antiq. xiv. ix. 4, xv. i. 1 and x. 4.↑126The Evang.Nicodemi indeed calls him, c. xvi.ὁ μέγας διδάσκαλος, and the Protev. Jacobi, c. xxiv. makes him a priest or even high priest, vid. Varr. ap. Thilo Cod. Apocr. N. T. 1, s. 271, comp. 203.↑1271 Th. s. 205 ff.↑128Cap. vi.Viditque illum Simeon senex instar columnæ lucis refulgentem, cum Domina Maria virgo, mater ejus, ulnis suis eum gestaret,—et circumdabant eum angeli instar circuli, celebrantes illum, etc. Ap. Thilo, p. 71.↑129Thus E. F. in the treatise, on the two first chapters ofMatth.andLuke.In Henke’s Mag. 5 bd. s. 169 f. A similar half measure is in Matthäi, Synopse der 4 Evan. s. 3, 5 f.↑130With the words of Simeon addressed to Mary:καὶ σοῦ δὲ αὐτῆς τὴν ψυχὲν διελεύσεται ῥομφαία(v. 35) comp. the words in the messianic psalm of sorrow,xxii. 21:ῥῦσαι ἀπὸ ῥομφαίας τὴν ψυχέν μου.↑131Schleiermacher, Ueber den Lukas, s. 37. Compare on the other hand the observations in § 18, with those of the authors there quoted, Note 19.↑132Neander here (s. 24 f.) mistakes the apocryphal for the mythical, as he had before done the poetical.↑133Olshausen, bibl. Comm. 1. s. 142 f.↑134Dial. c. Trypho, 78: Joseph came from Nazareth,where he lived, to Bethlehem,whence he was, to be enrolled,ἀνεληλύθει(Ἰωσὴφ)ἀπὸ Ναζαρὲτ, ἔνθα ὤκει, εἰς Βηθλεὲμ, ὅθεν ἦν, ἀπογράψασθαι. The wordsὅθεν ἦνmight however be understood as signifying merely the place of his tribe, especially if Justin’s addition be considered:For his race was of the tribe of Judah, which inhabits that land,ἀπο γὰρ τῆς κατοικούσης τὴν γῆν ἐκείνην φυλῆς Ἰούδα τὸ γένος ἦν.↑135Beiträge zur Einleit. in das N. T. 1. s. 217. Comp. Hoffmann, s. 238 f. 277 ff.↑136C. I. 8. 10.↑137Paulus, exeg. Handb. 1, a, s. 178.↑138Ueber die Unzulässigkeit der mythischen Auffassung u. s. f. 1, s. 101.↑139L. J. Ch. s. 33.↑140Tertull. adv. Marcion iv. 8. Epiphan. hær. xxix. 1.↑141Comp K. Ch. L. Schmidt, in Schmidt’s Bibliothek, 3, 1, s. 123 f.; Kaiser, bibl. Theol. 1, s. 230.↑142On this Heydenreich rests his defence, Ueber die Unzulässigkeit. 1. s. 99.↑143Ueber den Lukas, s. 49. There is a similar hesitation in Thelte, Biographie Jesu, § 15.↑144Ueber den Ursprung u. s. w., s. 68 f. u. s. 158.↑145Comp. Ammon. Fortbildung, 1, s. 194 ff.; De Wette, exeget. Handb. 1, 2, s. 24 f.; George, s. 84 ff. That different narrators may give different explanations of the same fact, and that these different explanations may afterwards be united in one book, is proved by many examples in the O. T. Thus in Genesis, three derivations are given of the name of Isaac; two of that of Jacob (xxv. 26.,xxvii. 16), and so of Edom and Beersheba (xxi. 31.,xxvi. 33). Comp. De Wette, Kritik der mos. Gesch., s. 110. 118 ff. and my Streitschriften, I, 1, s. 83 ff.↑
1Olshausen, Paulus, Kuinöl.↑2Tholuck, s. 194 ff. Neander, s. 19.↑3Cassiodor. Variarum, 3, 52. Isidor. Orig. 5, 36.↑4To refer here to theMonumentum Ancyranum, which is said to record a census of the whole empire in the year of Rome 746 (Osiander, p. 95), is proof of the greatest carelessness. For he who examines this inscription will find mention only of three assessmentscensus civium Romanorum, which Suetonius designatescensus populi, and of which Dio Cassius speaks, at least of one of them, asἀπογραφὴ τῶν ἐν τῇ Ἰταλίᾳ κατοικούντων. See Ideler, Chronol. 2, s. 339.↑5In the authoritative citations in Suidas are the words taken from Luke,αὔτη ἡ ἀπογραφὴ πρώτη ἐγένετο.↑6Hoffmann, s. 231.↑7Joseph. Antiq. 17, 13, 2. B. j. 2, 7, 3.↑8Antiq. 17, 13, 5. 18, 1, 1. B. j. 2, 8, 1.↑9Paulus, exeg. Handb. 1, a, s. 171. Winer, bibl. Realwörterbuch.↑10Tacit. Annal. 1, 11. Sueton. Octav. 191. But if in this documentopes publicæ continebantur: quantum civium sociorumque in armis; quot classes, regna, provinciæ, tributa aut vectigalia, et necessitates ac largitiones: the number of troops and the sum which the Jewish prince had to furnish, might have been given without a Roman tax being levied in their land. For Judea in particular Augustus had before him the subsequent census made by Quirinus.↑11Ὅτι, πάλαι χρώμενος αὐτῷ φιλω, νῦν ὑπηκόῳ χρήσεται. Joseph. Antiq. 16, 9, 3. But the difference was adjusted long before the death of Herod. Antiq. 16, 10, 9.↑12Joseph. Ant. 17, 2, 4.παντὸς τοῦ Ἰουδαϊκοῦ βεβαιώσαντος δι’ ὅρκων ἣ μὴν εὐνοῆσαι Καίσαρι καὶ τοῖς βασιλέως πράγμασι. That this oath, far from being a humiliating measure for Herod, coincided with his interest, is proved by the zeal with which he punished the Pharisees who refused to take it.↑13Tholuck, s. 192 f. But the insurrection which theἀπογραφὴafter the depositions of Archelaus actually occasioned—a fact which outweighs all Tholuck’s surmises—proves it to have been the first Roman measure of the kind in Judea.↑14Antiq. 17, 9, 10, 1 ff. B. j. 2. 2. 2. His oppressions however had reference only to the fortresses and the treasures of Herod.↑15Antiq. 18, 1, 1.↑16Bell. jud. 2, 8, 1. 9. 1. Antiq. 17, 13, 5.↑17Kuinöl, Comm. in Luc. p. 320.↑18Winer.↑19Adv. Marcion. 4, 19.↑20Storr, opusc. acad. 3, s. 126 f.Süskind, vermischte Aufsätze, s. 63. Tholuck, s. 182 f.↑21Michaelis, Anm. z. d. St. und Einl. in d. N.T. 1, 71.↑22Münter, Stern der Weisen, s. 88.↑23Paulus. Wetstein.↑24Credner.↑25In Schmidt’sBibliothek für Kritik und Exegese, 3, 1. s. 124. See Kaiser, bibl. Theol. 1, s. 230; Ammon, Fortbildung, 1, s. 196; Credner, Einleitung, in d. N.T. 1, s. 155; De Wette, exeget. Handbuch.↑26Chap. 17. Compare Historia de nativ. Mariae et de infantiâ Servatoris, c. 13.↑27Fabricius, im Codex Apocryph. N.T. 1, s. 105, not. y.↑28Ambrosius and Jerome. See Gieseler, K. G. 1, s. 516.↑29Dial. c. Tryph. 78.↑30C. Cels. 1, 51.↑31Hess, Olshausen, Paulus.↑32Paulus.↑33Chap. 14.↑34Chap. 4 in Thilo, s. 69.↑35In seinem Versuch über die Wundergeschichten des N. T.See Gabler’sNeuestes theol. Journal, 7, 4, s. 411.↑36Exeg. Handb. s. 180 ff. As Paulus supposes an external natural phenomenon so Matthæi imagines a mental vision of angels. Synopse der vier Evangelien, s. 3.↑37Hebräische Mythologie, 2. Thl. s. 223 ff.↑38Recension von Bauer’s hebr. Mythologie in Gabler’s Journal für auserlesene theol. Literatur, 2, 1, s. 58 f.↑39Neuestes theol. Journal, 7, 4, s. 412 f.↑40In Luc. 2. in Suicer, 2, p. 789.↑41Servius ad Verg. Ecl. 10, 26.↑42Liban. progymn. p. 138, in Wetstein, s. 662.↑43Thus Cyrus, see Herod. 1, 110 ff. Romulus, see Livy, 1, 4.↑44Thilo, Codex Apocr. N. T. 1, s. 383 not.↑45Vid. Schöttgen, 2, s. 531.↑46Sota, 1, 48:Sapientes nostri perhibent, circa horam nativitatis Mosis totam domum repletam fuisse luce(Wetstein).↑47Ueber den Lukas, s. 29. f. With whom Neander and others now agree.—L. J. Ch. s. 21 f.↑48Comp. De Wette, Kritik der mosaischen Geschichte, s. 116; George, Mythus u. Sage, s. 33 f.↑49Gen. xxxvii. 11(LXX.):Ἐζήλωσαν δὲ οὐτὸν οἱ ἀδελφοὶ αὐτοῦ, ὁ δὲ πατὴρ αὐτοῦ διετήρησε τὸ ῥῆμα.—Schöttgen, horae, 1, 262.Luc. 2, 18 f.:καὶ πάντες οἱ ἀκούσαντες ἐθαύμασαν — — ἡ δὲ Μαριὰμ πάντα συνετήρει τὰ ῥήματα ταῦτα, συμβάλλουσα ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ αὐτῆς.2, 51:καὶ ἡ μήτηρ αὐτοῦ διετήρει πάντα τὰ ῥήματα ταῦτα ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ αὐτῆς.50See Introduction.↑51Perhaps as a precautionary measure to obviate objections on the part of the Jews. (Ammon, Fortbildung, 1, s. 217.)↑52Pirke R. Elieser, 33:Sex hominum nomina dicta sunt, antequam nascerentur: Isaaci nempe, Ismaëlis, Mosis, Salomonis, Josiæ et nomen regis Messiæ.Bereschith rabba, sect. 1, fol. 3, 3.—(Schöttgen, horae, 2, s. 436):Sex res prævenerunt creationem mundi: quædam ex illis creatæ sunt, nempe lex et thronus gloriæ; aliæ ascenderunt in cogitationem (Dei) ut crearentur, nimirum Patriarchæ, Israël, templum, et nomen Messiæ.↑53Comp. Schneckenburger, über den Ursprung des ersten kanonischen Evangeliums, s. 69 ff.↑54Joseph. B. J. vi. vi. 4: Tacit. Histor. v. 13; Sueton. Vespas. 4. All the extant allusions to the existence of such a hope at the era of Christ’s birth, relate only in an indeterminate manner to a ruler of the world. Virg. Eclog. 4; Sueton. Octav. 94.↑55In saying that it is inadmissible to suppose a divine intervention directly tending to countenance superstition, I refer to what is calledimmediateintervention. In the doctrine ofmediateintervention, which includes the co-operation of man, there is doubtless a mixture of truth and error. Neander confuses the two. L. J. Ch., s. 29.↑56Paulus and De Wette, exeg. Handb. in loc.↑57According to Hoffmann (p. 256), that he might control the assertion of the magi by inquiring of his own astrologers, whether they had seen the star at the same time. This is not merely unsupported by the text—it is in direct contradiction to it, for we are there told that Herod at once gave terrified credence to the magi.↑58Fritzsche, in loc. aptly says—comperto, quasi magos non ad se redituros statim scivisset, orti sideris tempore, etc.↑59K. Ch. L. Schmidt, exeg. Beiträge, 1, s. 150 f. Comp. Fritzsche and De Wette in loc.↑60Hoffman thinks that Herod shunned this measure as a breach of hospitality; yet this very Herod he represents as a monster of cruelty, and that justly, for the conduct attributed to the monarch in chap. ii. of Matthew is not unworthy of his heart, against which Neander superfluously argues (p. 30 f.), but of his head.↑61Schmidt, ut sup. p. 155 f.↑62Stark, Synops. bibl. exeg. in N. T., p. 62.↑63This was the opinion of some of the Fathers,e.g.Euseb. Demonstr. evang. 9, ap. Suicer, 1, s. 559; Joann. Damasc. de fide orthod. ii. 7.↑64Chrysostomus and others ap. Suicer, ut sup. and the Evang. infant. arab. c. vii.↑65See Kuinöl, Comm. in Matth., p. 23.↑66Vermischte Aufsätze, s. 8.↑67Bibl. Comm. in loc, Hoffmann, s. 261.↑68Schmidt, exeg. Beiträge, 1, 152 ff.↑69This is shown in opposition to Olshausen by Steudel in Bengel’s Archiv. vii. ii. 425 f. viii. iii. 487.↑70Schmidt, ut sup. p. 156.↑71Babylon. Sanhedr. f. cvii. 2, ap. Lightfoot, p. 207. Comp. Schöttgen, ii. p. 533. According to Josephus Antiq. xiii. xiii. 5, xiv. 2, they were Jews of each sex and of all ages, and chiefly Pharisees.↑72Joseph. B. J. i. xxx. 3. Comp. Antiq. xvii. iv. 1.↑73Macrob. Saturnal. ii. 4:Quum audisset (Augustus) inter pueros, quos in Syriâ Herodes rex Judæorum intra bimatum jussit interfici, filium quoque ejus occisum, ait: melius est, Herodis porcum (ὗν) esse quam filium (υἱόν).↑74Vid. Wetstein, Kuinöl, Olshausen in loc. Winer d. A. Herodes.↑75Fritzsche, Comm. in Matt., p. 93 f.↑76Chrysostom and others.↑77Vid. Gratz, Comm. zum Ev. Matth. 1, s. 115.↑78Kuinöl, ad Matth. p. 44 f.↑79Wetstein, in loc.↑80Schneckenburger, Beiträge zur Einleitung in das N. T., s. 42.↑81Gieseler, Studien und Kritiken, 1831, 3. Heft, s. 588 f. Fritzsche, s. 104. Comp. Hieron. ad Jesai. xi. 1.↑82For both these explanations, see Kuinöl, in loc.↑83Kepler, in various treatises; Münter, der Stern der Weisen; Ideler, Handbuch der mathemat. und technischen Chronologie, 2. Bd. s. 399 ff.↑84Olshausen, s. 67.↑85Paulus, ut sup. s. 202, 221.↑86Bengel’s Archiv. vii. ii. p. 424.↑87At a later period, it is true, this journey of Jesus was the occasion of calumnies from the Jews, but those were of an entirely different nature, as will be seen in the following chapter.↑88Ueber formelle oder genetische Erklärungsart der Wunder. In Henke’s Museum, 1, 3, 399 ff. Similar essays see in the Abhandlungen über die beiden ersten Kapitel des Matthäus u. Lukas, in Henke’s Magazin, 5, 1, 171 ff., and in Matthäi, Religionsgl. der Apostel, 2, s. 422 ff.↑89L. J. Ch., s. 29 ff.↑90Orig. c. Cels. i. 60. Auctor, op. imperf. in Matth. ap. Fabricius Pseudepigr. V. T., p. 807 ff.↑91Schmidt’s Bibliothek, 3, 1, s. 130.↑92In loc. Num. (Schöttgen, horæ, ii. p. 152):Multi Interpretati sunt hæc de Messiâ.↑93Justin,Hist. 37.↑94Sueton. Jul. Cæs. 88.↑95Jalkut Rubeni, f. xxxii. 3 (ap. Wetstein):quâ horâ natus est Abrahamus, pater noster, super quem sit pax, stetit quoddam sidus in oriente et deglutivit quatuor astra, quæ erant in quatuor cœli plagis. According to an Arabic writing entitled Maallem, this star, prognosticating the birth of Abraham, was seen by Nimrod in a dream. Fabric. Cod. pseudepigr. V. T. i. s. 345.↑96Testamentum XII. Patriarcharum, test. Levi, 18 (Fabric. Cod. pseud. V. T. p. 584 f.):καὶ ἀνατελεῖ ἄστρον αὐτοῦ(of the Messianicἱερεὺς καινὸς)ἐν οὐρανῷ,—φωτίζον φῶς γνώσεως κ.τ.λ.Pesikta Sotarta, f. xlviii. 1 (ap. Schöttgen, ii. p. 531):Et prodibit stella ab oriente, quæ est stella Messiæ, et in oriente versabitur dies X V. Comp. Sohar Genes. f. 74. Schöttgen, ii. 524, and some other passages which are pointed out by Ideler in the Handbuch der Chronologie, 2 Bd. s. 409, Anm. 1, and Bertholdt, Christologia Judæorum, § 14.↑97Compare with the passages cited Note 7. Protevang. Jac. cap. xxi.:εἴδομεν ἀστέρα παμμεγέθη, λάμψαντα ἐν τοῖς ἄστροις τοὺτοις καὶ ἀμβλύνοντα αὐτοὺς τοῦ φαίνειν. Still more exaggerated in Ignat. ep. ad Ephes. 19. See the collection of passages connected with this subject in Thilo, cod. apocr. i. p. 390 f.↑98Exeg. Beiträge, i. s. 159 ff.↑99Fritzsche in the paraphrase of chap. ii.Etiam stella, quam judaica disciplina sub Messiæ natale visum iri dicit, quo Jesus nascebatur tempore exorta est.↑100As inMatt. ii. 11it is said of the magiτροσήνενκαν αὐτῷ—χρυσὸν καὶ λίβανον: so inIsa. lx. 6(LXX.):ἥξουσί, φέροντες χρυσίον, καὶ λίβανον οἴσουσι. The third present is in Matt.σμύρνα, in Isa.λίθος τίμιος.↑101V. 1.und3:כִּי בָא אוֹרֵךְ וּכְבוֹד יהוָֹה עָלַיִךְ(LXX:Ἰερουσαλὴμ)קוּמִי אוֹרִי זָרָח:—וְהָלְכוּ גּוֹיִם לְאוֹרֵךְ וּמְלָכִים לְנֹגַהּ זָרְחֵךְ↑102Æneid, ii. 693 ff.↑103Wetstein, in loc.↑104Herod, i. 108 ff. Liv. i. 4.↑105Octav. 94:—ante paucos quam nasceretur menses prodigium Romæ factum publice, quo denuntiabatur, regem populi Romani naturam parturire. Senatum exterritum, censuisse, ne quis illo anno genitus educaretur. Eos, qui gravidas uxores haberent, quo ad se quisque spem traheret, curasse, ne Senatus consultum ad ærarium deferretur.↑106Bauer (über das Mythische in der früheren Lebensper. des Moses, in the n. Theol.[176]Journ. 13, 3) had already compared the marvellous deliverance of Moses with that of Cyrus and Romulus; the comparison of the infanticides was added by De Wette, Kritik der Mos. Geschichte, s. 176.↑107Joseph. Antiq. ii. ix. 2.↑108Jalkut Rubeni (cont. of the passage cited in Note 6):dixerunt sapientes Nimrodi: natus est Tharæ filius hâc ipsâ horâ, ex quo egressurus est populus, qui hæreditabit præsens et futurum seculum; si tibi placuerit, detur patri ipsius domus argento auroque plena, et occidat ipsum. Comp. the passage of the Arabic book quoted by Fabric. Cod. pseudepigr. ut sup.↑109Protev. Jacobi, c. xxii. f.↑110Ex. iv. 19, LXX:βάδιζε, ἄπελθε εἰς Αἴγυπτον, τεθνήκασι γὰρ πάντες οἱ ζητοῦντές σου τὴν ψυχὴν.Matt. ii. 20:ἐγερθεὶς—πορεύου εἰς γῆν Ἰσραήλ· τεθνήκασι γὰρ οἱ ζητοῦντες τὴν ψυχὴν τοῦ παιδίου.We may remark that the inappropriate use of the plural in the evangelical passage, can only be explained on the supposition of a reference to the passage in Exod. See Winer, N. T. Gramm. s. 149. Comp. alsoExod. iv. 20withMatt. ii. 14,21.↑111Vide e.g. Schöttgen, Horæ, ii. p. 209.↑112Theile, zurBiographieJesu, § 15, Anm. 9. Hoffmann, s. 269.↑113Comp. my Streitschriften, i. 1, s. 42 f.; George, s. 39.↑114Neander, L. J. Ch. s. 27.↑115Schleiermacher (Ueber den Lukas, s. 47), explains the narrative concerning the magi as a symbolical one; but he scorns to take into consideration the passages from the O. T. and other writings, which have a bearing on the subject, and by way of retribution, his exposition at one time rests in generalities, at another, takes a wrong path.↑116Lightfoot, Horæ, p. 202.↑117Schneckenburger, Ueber den Ursprung des ersten kanonischen Evangeliums, s. 69 ff.↑118Thus, e.g. Augustin de consensu evangelistarum, ii. 5. Storr, opusc. acad. iii. s. 96 ff. Süskind, inBengel’sArchiv. i. 1, s. 216 ff.↑119E.g. Hess, Geschichte Jesu, 1, s. 51 ff. Paulus, Olshausen, in loc.↑120Süskind, ut sup. s. 222.↑121The same difference as to the chronological relation of the two incidents exists between the two different texts of the apocryphal book: Historia de nativitate Mariæ et de inf. Serv., see Thilo, p. 385, not.↑122This incompatibility of the two narratives was perceived at an early period by some opponents of Christianity. Epiphanius names one Philosabbatius, together with Celsus and Porphyry (hæres. li. 8).↑123Neander, L. J. Ch. s. 33, Anm.↑124Schleiermacher, Ueber den Lukas, s. 47. Schneckenburger, ut sup.↑125Antiq. xiv. ix. 4, xv. i. 1 and x. 4.↑126The Evang.Nicodemi indeed calls him, c. xvi.ὁ μέγας διδάσκαλος, and the Protev. Jacobi, c. xxiv. makes him a priest or even high priest, vid. Varr. ap. Thilo Cod. Apocr. N. T. 1, s. 271, comp. 203.↑1271 Th. s. 205 ff.↑128Cap. vi.Viditque illum Simeon senex instar columnæ lucis refulgentem, cum Domina Maria virgo, mater ejus, ulnis suis eum gestaret,—et circumdabant eum angeli instar circuli, celebrantes illum, etc. Ap. Thilo, p. 71.↑129Thus E. F. in the treatise, on the two first chapters ofMatth.andLuke.In Henke’s Mag. 5 bd. s. 169 f. A similar half measure is in Matthäi, Synopse der 4 Evan. s. 3, 5 f.↑130With the words of Simeon addressed to Mary:καὶ σοῦ δὲ αὐτῆς τὴν ψυχὲν διελεύσεται ῥομφαία(v. 35) comp. the words in the messianic psalm of sorrow,xxii. 21:ῥῦσαι ἀπὸ ῥομφαίας τὴν ψυχέν μου.↑131Schleiermacher, Ueber den Lukas, s. 37. Compare on the other hand the observations in § 18, with those of the authors there quoted, Note 19.↑132Neander here (s. 24 f.) mistakes the apocryphal for the mythical, as he had before done the poetical.↑133Olshausen, bibl. Comm. 1. s. 142 f.↑134Dial. c. Trypho, 78: Joseph came from Nazareth,where he lived, to Bethlehem,whence he was, to be enrolled,ἀνεληλύθει(Ἰωσὴφ)ἀπὸ Ναζαρὲτ, ἔνθα ὤκει, εἰς Βηθλεὲμ, ὅθεν ἦν, ἀπογράψασθαι. The wordsὅθεν ἦνmight however be understood as signifying merely the place of his tribe, especially if Justin’s addition be considered:For his race was of the tribe of Judah, which inhabits that land,ἀπο γὰρ τῆς κατοικούσης τὴν γῆν ἐκείνην φυλῆς Ἰούδα τὸ γένος ἦν.↑135Beiträge zur Einleit. in das N. T. 1. s. 217. Comp. Hoffmann, s. 238 f. 277 ff.↑136C. I. 8. 10.↑137Paulus, exeg. Handb. 1, a, s. 178.↑138Ueber die Unzulässigkeit der mythischen Auffassung u. s. f. 1, s. 101.↑139L. J. Ch. s. 33.↑140Tertull. adv. Marcion iv. 8. Epiphan. hær. xxix. 1.↑141Comp K. Ch. L. Schmidt, in Schmidt’s Bibliothek, 3, 1, s. 123 f.; Kaiser, bibl. Theol. 1, s. 230.↑142On this Heydenreich rests his defence, Ueber die Unzulässigkeit. 1. s. 99.↑143Ueber den Lukas, s. 49. There is a similar hesitation in Thelte, Biographie Jesu, § 15.↑144Ueber den Ursprung u. s. w., s. 68 f. u. s. 158.↑145Comp. Ammon. Fortbildung, 1, s. 194 ff.; De Wette, exeget. Handb. 1, 2, s. 24 f.; George, s. 84 ff. That different narrators may give different explanations of the same fact, and that these different explanations may afterwards be united in one book, is proved by many examples in the O. T. Thus in Genesis, three derivations are given of the name of Isaac; two of that of Jacob (xxv. 26.,xxvii. 16), and so of Edom and Beersheba (xxi. 31.,xxvi. 33). Comp. De Wette, Kritik der mos. Gesch., s. 110. 118 ff. and my Streitschriften, I, 1, s. 83 ff.↑
1Olshausen, Paulus, Kuinöl.↑
1Olshausen, Paulus, Kuinöl.↑
2Tholuck, s. 194 ff. Neander, s. 19.↑
2Tholuck, s. 194 ff. Neander, s. 19.↑
3Cassiodor. Variarum, 3, 52. Isidor. Orig. 5, 36.↑
3Cassiodor. Variarum, 3, 52. Isidor. Orig. 5, 36.↑
4To refer here to theMonumentum Ancyranum, which is said to record a census of the whole empire in the year of Rome 746 (Osiander, p. 95), is proof of the greatest carelessness. For he who examines this inscription will find mention only of three assessmentscensus civium Romanorum, which Suetonius designatescensus populi, and of which Dio Cassius speaks, at least of one of them, asἀπογραφὴ τῶν ἐν τῇ Ἰταλίᾳ κατοικούντων. See Ideler, Chronol. 2, s. 339.↑
4To refer here to theMonumentum Ancyranum, which is said to record a census of the whole empire in the year of Rome 746 (Osiander, p. 95), is proof of the greatest carelessness. For he who examines this inscription will find mention only of three assessmentscensus civium Romanorum, which Suetonius designatescensus populi, and of which Dio Cassius speaks, at least of one of them, asἀπογραφὴ τῶν ἐν τῇ Ἰταλίᾳ κατοικούντων. See Ideler, Chronol. 2, s. 339.↑
5In the authoritative citations in Suidas are the words taken from Luke,αὔτη ἡ ἀπογραφὴ πρώτη ἐγένετο.↑
5In the authoritative citations in Suidas are the words taken from Luke,αὔτη ἡ ἀπογραφὴ πρώτη ἐγένετο.↑
6Hoffmann, s. 231.↑
6Hoffmann, s. 231.↑
7Joseph. Antiq. 17, 13, 2. B. j. 2, 7, 3.↑
7Joseph. Antiq. 17, 13, 2. B. j. 2, 7, 3.↑
8Antiq. 17, 13, 5. 18, 1, 1. B. j. 2, 8, 1.↑
8Antiq. 17, 13, 5. 18, 1, 1. B. j. 2, 8, 1.↑
9Paulus, exeg. Handb. 1, a, s. 171. Winer, bibl. Realwörterbuch.↑
9Paulus, exeg. Handb. 1, a, s. 171. Winer, bibl. Realwörterbuch.↑
10Tacit. Annal. 1, 11. Sueton. Octav. 191. But if in this documentopes publicæ continebantur: quantum civium sociorumque in armis; quot classes, regna, provinciæ, tributa aut vectigalia, et necessitates ac largitiones: the number of troops and the sum which the Jewish prince had to furnish, might have been given without a Roman tax being levied in their land. For Judea in particular Augustus had before him the subsequent census made by Quirinus.↑
10Tacit. Annal. 1, 11. Sueton. Octav. 191. But if in this documentopes publicæ continebantur: quantum civium sociorumque in armis; quot classes, regna, provinciæ, tributa aut vectigalia, et necessitates ac largitiones: the number of troops and the sum which the Jewish prince had to furnish, might have been given without a Roman tax being levied in their land. For Judea in particular Augustus had before him the subsequent census made by Quirinus.↑
11Ὅτι, πάλαι χρώμενος αὐτῷ φιλω, νῦν ὑπηκόῳ χρήσεται. Joseph. Antiq. 16, 9, 3. But the difference was adjusted long before the death of Herod. Antiq. 16, 10, 9.↑
11Ὅτι, πάλαι χρώμενος αὐτῷ φιλω, νῦν ὑπηκόῳ χρήσεται. Joseph. Antiq. 16, 9, 3. But the difference was adjusted long before the death of Herod. Antiq. 16, 10, 9.↑
12Joseph. Ant. 17, 2, 4.παντὸς τοῦ Ἰουδαϊκοῦ βεβαιώσαντος δι’ ὅρκων ἣ μὴν εὐνοῆσαι Καίσαρι καὶ τοῖς βασιλέως πράγμασι. That this oath, far from being a humiliating measure for Herod, coincided with his interest, is proved by the zeal with which he punished the Pharisees who refused to take it.↑
12Joseph. Ant. 17, 2, 4.παντὸς τοῦ Ἰουδαϊκοῦ βεβαιώσαντος δι’ ὅρκων ἣ μὴν εὐνοῆσαι Καίσαρι καὶ τοῖς βασιλέως πράγμασι. That this oath, far from being a humiliating measure for Herod, coincided with his interest, is proved by the zeal with which he punished the Pharisees who refused to take it.↑
13Tholuck, s. 192 f. But the insurrection which theἀπογραφὴafter the depositions of Archelaus actually occasioned—a fact which outweighs all Tholuck’s surmises—proves it to have been the first Roman measure of the kind in Judea.↑
13Tholuck, s. 192 f. But the insurrection which theἀπογραφὴafter the depositions of Archelaus actually occasioned—a fact which outweighs all Tholuck’s surmises—proves it to have been the first Roman measure of the kind in Judea.↑
14Antiq. 17, 9, 10, 1 ff. B. j. 2. 2. 2. His oppressions however had reference only to the fortresses and the treasures of Herod.↑
14Antiq. 17, 9, 10, 1 ff. B. j. 2. 2. 2. His oppressions however had reference only to the fortresses and the treasures of Herod.↑
15Antiq. 18, 1, 1.↑
15Antiq. 18, 1, 1.↑
16Bell. jud. 2, 8, 1. 9. 1. Antiq. 17, 13, 5.↑
16Bell. jud. 2, 8, 1. 9. 1. Antiq. 17, 13, 5.↑
17Kuinöl, Comm. in Luc. p. 320.↑
17Kuinöl, Comm. in Luc. p. 320.↑
18Winer.↑
18Winer.↑
19Adv. Marcion. 4, 19.↑
19Adv. Marcion. 4, 19.↑
20Storr, opusc. acad. 3, s. 126 f.Süskind, vermischte Aufsätze, s. 63. Tholuck, s. 182 f.↑
20Storr, opusc. acad. 3, s. 126 f.Süskind, vermischte Aufsätze, s. 63. Tholuck, s. 182 f.↑
21Michaelis, Anm. z. d. St. und Einl. in d. N.T. 1, 71.↑
21Michaelis, Anm. z. d. St. und Einl. in d. N.T. 1, 71.↑
22Münter, Stern der Weisen, s. 88.↑
22Münter, Stern der Weisen, s. 88.↑
23Paulus. Wetstein.↑
23Paulus. Wetstein.↑
24Credner.↑
24Credner.↑
25In Schmidt’sBibliothek für Kritik und Exegese, 3, 1. s. 124. See Kaiser, bibl. Theol. 1, s. 230; Ammon, Fortbildung, 1, s. 196; Credner, Einleitung, in d. N.T. 1, s. 155; De Wette, exeget. Handbuch.↑
25In Schmidt’sBibliothek für Kritik und Exegese, 3, 1. s. 124. See Kaiser, bibl. Theol. 1, s. 230; Ammon, Fortbildung, 1, s. 196; Credner, Einleitung, in d. N.T. 1, s. 155; De Wette, exeget. Handbuch.↑
26Chap. 17. Compare Historia de nativ. Mariae et de infantiâ Servatoris, c. 13.↑
26Chap. 17. Compare Historia de nativ. Mariae et de infantiâ Servatoris, c. 13.↑
27Fabricius, im Codex Apocryph. N.T. 1, s. 105, not. y.↑
27Fabricius, im Codex Apocryph. N.T. 1, s. 105, not. y.↑
28Ambrosius and Jerome. See Gieseler, K. G. 1, s. 516.↑
28Ambrosius and Jerome. See Gieseler, K. G. 1, s. 516.↑
29Dial. c. Tryph. 78.↑
29Dial. c. Tryph. 78.↑
30C. Cels. 1, 51.↑
30C. Cels. 1, 51.↑
31Hess, Olshausen, Paulus.↑
31Hess, Olshausen, Paulus.↑
32Paulus.↑
32Paulus.↑
33Chap. 14.↑
33Chap. 14.↑
34Chap. 4 in Thilo, s. 69.↑
34Chap. 4 in Thilo, s. 69.↑
35In seinem Versuch über die Wundergeschichten des N. T.See Gabler’sNeuestes theol. Journal, 7, 4, s. 411.↑
35In seinem Versuch über die Wundergeschichten des N. T.See Gabler’sNeuestes theol. Journal, 7, 4, s. 411.↑
36Exeg. Handb. s. 180 ff. As Paulus supposes an external natural phenomenon so Matthæi imagines a mental vision of angels. Synopse der vier Evangelien, s. 3.↑
36Exeg. Handb. s. 180 ff. As Paulus supposes an external natural phenomenon so Matthæi imagines a mental vision of angels. Synopse der vier Evangelien, s. 3.↑
37Hebräische Mythologie, 2. Thl. s. 223 ff.↑
37Hebräische Mythologie, 2. Thl. s. 223 ff.↑
38Recension von Bauer’s hebr. Mythologie in Gabler’s Journal für auserlesene theol. Literatur, 2, 1, s. 58 f.↑
38Recension von Bauer’s hebr. Mythologie in Gabler’s Journal für auserlesene theol. Literatur, 2, 1, s. 58 f.↑
39Neuestes theol. Journal, 7, 4, s. 412 f.↑
39Neuestes theol. Journal, 7, 4, s. 412 f.↑
40In Luc. 2. in Suicer, 2, p. 789.↑
40In Luc. 2. in Suicer, 2, p. 789.↑
41Servius ad Verg. Ecl. 10, 26.↑
41Servius ad Verg. Ecl. 10, 26.↑
42Liban. progymn. p. 138, in Wetstein, s. 662.↑
42Liban. progymn. p. 138, in Wetstein, s. 662.↑
43Thus Cyrus, see Herod. 1, 110 ff. Romulus, see Livy, 1, 4.↑
43Thus Cyrus, see Herod. 1, 110 ff. Romulus, see Livy, 1, 4.↑
44Thilo, Codex Apocr. N. T. 1, s. 383 not.↑
44Thilo, Codex Apocr. N. T. 1, s. 383 not.↑
45Vid. Schöttgen, 2, s. 531.↑
45Vid. Schöttgen, 2, s. 531.↑
46Sota, 1, 48:Sapientes nostri perhibent, circa horam nativitatis Mosis totam domum repletam fuisse luce(Wetstein).↑
46Sota, 1, 48:Sapientes nostri perhibent, circa horam nativitatis Mosis totam domum repletam fuisse luce(Wetstein).↑
47Ueber den Lukas, s. 29. f. With whom Neander and others now agree.—L. J. Ch. s. 21 f.↑
47Ueber den Lukas, s. 29. f. With whom Neander and others now agree.—L. J. Ch. s. 21 f.↑
48Comp. De Wette, Kritik der mosaischen Geschichte, s. 116; George, Mythus u. Sage, s. 33 f.↑
48Comp. De Wette, Kritik der mosaischen Geschichte, s. 116; George, Mythus u. Sage, s. 33 f.↑
49Gen. xxxvii. 11(LXX.):Ἐζήλωσαν δὲ οὐτὸν οἱ ἀδελφοὶ αὐτοῦ, ὁ δὲ πατὴρ αὐτοῦ διετήρησε τὸ ῥῆμα.—Schöttgen, horae, 1, 262.Luc. 2, 18 f.:καὶ πάντες οἱ ἀκούσαντες ἐθαύμασαν — — ἡ δὲ Μαριὰμ πάντα συνετήρει τὰ ῥήματα ταῦτα, συμβάλλουσα ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ αὐτῆς.2, 51:καὶ ἡ μήτηρ αὐτοῦ διετήρει πάντα τὰ ῥήματα ταῦτα ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ αὐτῆς.
49
Gen. xxxvii. 11(LXX.):Ἐζήλωσαν δὲ οὐτὸν οἱ ἀδελφοὶ αὐτοῦ, ὁ δὲ πατὴρ αὐτοῦ διετήρησε τὸ ῥῆμα.—Schöttgen, horae, 1, 262.Luc. 2, 18 f.:καὶ πάντες οἱ ἀκούσαντες ἐθαύμασαν — — ἡ δὲ Μαριὰμ πάντα συνετήρει τὰ ῥήματα ταῦτα, συμβάλλουσα ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ αὐτῆς.2, 51:καὶ ἡ μήτηρ αὐτοῦ διετήρει πάντα τὰ ῥήματα ταῦτα ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ αὐτῆς.
Ἐζήλωσαν δὲ οὐτὸν οἱ ἀδελφοὶ αὐτοῦ, ὁ δὲ πατὴρ αὐτοῦ διετήρησε τὸ ῥῆμα.—Schöttgen, horae, 1, 262.
καὶ πάντες οἱ ἀκούσαντες ἐθαύμασαν — — ἡ δὲ Μαριὰμ πάντα συνετήρει τὰ ῥήματα ταῦτα, συμβάλλουσα ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ αὐτῆς.2, 51:καὶ ἡ μήτηρ αὐτοῦ διετήρει πάντα τὰ ῥήματα ταῦτα ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ αὐτῆς.
50See Introduction.↑
50See Introduction.↑
51Perhaps as a precautionary measure to obviate objections on the part of the Jews. (Ammon, Fortbildung, 1, s. 217.)↑
51Perhaps as a precautionary measure to obviate objections on the part of the Jews. (Ammon, Fortbildung, 1, s. 217.)↑
52Pirke R. Elieser, 33:Sex hominum nomina dicta sunt, antequam nascerentur: Isaaci nempe, Ismaëlis, Mosis, Salomonis, Josiæ et nomen regis Messiæ.Bereschith rabba, sect. 1, fol. 3, 3.—(Schöttgen, horae, 2, s. 436):Sex res prævenerunt creationem mundi: quædam ex illis creatæ sunt, nempe lex et thronus gloriæ; aliæ ascenderunt in cogitationem (Dei) ut crearentur, nimirum Patriarchæ, Israël, templum, et nomen Messiæ.↑
52Pirke R. Elieser, 33:Sex hominum nomina dicta sunt, antequam nascerentur: Isaaci nempe, Ismaëlis, Mosis, Salomonis, Josiæ et nomen regis Messiæ.Bereschith rabba, sect. 1, fol. 3, 3.—(Schöttgen, horae, 2, s. 436):Sex res prævenerunt creationem mundi: quædam ex illis creatæ sunt, nempe lex et thronus gloriæ; aliæ ascenderunt in cogitationem (Dei) ut crearentur, nimirum Patriarchæ, Israël, templum, et nomen Messiæ.↑
53Comp. Schneckenburger, über den Ursprung des ersten kanonischen Evangeliums, s. 69 ff.↑
53Comp. Schneckenburger, über den Ursprung des ersten kanonischen Evangeliums, s. 69 ff.↑
54Joseph. B. J. vi. vi. 4: Tacit. Histor. v. 13; Sueton. Vespas. 4. All the extant allusions to the existence of such a hope at the era of Christ’s birth, relate only in an indeterminate manner to a ruler of the world. Virg. Eclog. 4; Sueton. Octav. 94.↑
54Joseph. B. J. vi. vi. 4: Tacit. Histor. v. 13; Sueton. Vespas. 4. All the extant allusions to the existence of such a hope at the era of Christ’s birth, relate only in an indeterminate manner to a ruler of the world. Virg. Eclog. 4; Sueton. Octav. 94.↑
55In saying that it is inadmissible to suppose a divine intervention directly tending to countenance superstition, I refer to what is calledimmediateintervention. In the doctrine ofmediateintervention, which includes the co-operation of man, there is doubtless a mixture of truth and error. Neander confuses the two. L. J. Ch., s. 29.↑
55In saying that it is inadmissible to suppose a divine intervention directly tending to countenance superstition, I refer to what is calledimmediateintervention. In the doctrine ofmediateintervention, which includes the co-operation of man, there is doubtless a mixture of truth and error. Neander confuses the two. L. J. Ch., s. 29.↑
56Paulus and De Wette, exeg. Handb. in loc.↑
56Paulus and De Wette, exeg. Handb. in loc.↑
57According to Hoffmann (p. 256), that he might control the assertion of the magi by inquiring of his own astrologers, whether they had seen the star at the same time. This is not merely unsupported by the text—it is in direct contradiction to it, for we are there told that Herod at once gave terrified credence to the magi.↑
57According to Hoffmann (p. 256), that he might control the assertion of the magi by inquiring of his own astrologers, whether they had seen the star at the same time. This is not merely unsupported by the text—it is in direct contradiction to it, for we are there told that Herod at once gave terrified credence to the magi.↑
58Fritzsche, in loc. aptly says—comperto, quasi magos non ad se redituros statim scivisset, orti sideris tempore, etc.↑
58Fritzsche, in loc. aptly says—comperto, quasi magos non ad se redituros statim scivisset, orti sideris tempore, etc.↑
59K. Ch. L. Schmidt, exeg. Beiträge, 1, s. 150 f. Comp. Fritzsche and De Wette in loc.↑
59K. Ch. L. Schmidt, exeg. Beiträge, 1, s. 150 f. Comp. Fritzsche and De Wette in loc.↑
60Hoffman thinks that Herod shunned this measure as a breach of hospitality; yet this very Herod he represents as a monster of cruelty, and that justly, for the conduct attributed to the monarch in chap. ii. of Matthew is not unworthy of his heart, against which Neander superfluously argues (p. 30 f.), but of his head.↑
60Hoffman thinks that Herod shunned this measure as a breach of hospitality; yet this very Herod he represents as a monster of cruelty, and that justly, for the conduct attributed to the monarch in chap. ii. of Matthew is not unworthy of his heart, against which Neander superfluously argues (p. 30 f.), but of his head.↑
61Schmidt, ut sup. p. 155 f.↑
61Schmidt, ut sup. p. 155 f.↑
62Stark, Synops. bibl. exeg. in N. T., p. 62.↑
62Stark, Synops. bibl. exeg. in N. T., p. 62.↑
63This was the opinion of some of the Fathers,e.g.Euseb. Demonstr. evang. 9, ap. Suicer, 1, s. 559; Joann. Damasc. de fide orthod. ii. 7.↑
63This was the opinion of some of the Fathers,e.g.Euseb. Demonstr. evang. 9, ap. Suicer, 1, s. 559; Joann. Damasc. de fide orthod. ii. 7.↑
64Chrysostomus and others ap. Suicer, ut sup. and the Evang. infant. arab. c. vii.↑
64Chrysostomus and others ap. Suicer, ut sup. and the Evang. infant. arab. c. vii.↑
65See Kuinöl, Comm. in Matth., p. 23.↑
65See Kuinöl, Comm. in Matth., p. 23.↑
66Vermischte Aufsätze, s. 8.↑
66Vermischte Aufsätze, s. 8.↑
67Bibl. Comm. in loc, Hoffmann, s. 261.↑
67Bibl. Comm. in loc, Hoffmann, s. 261.↑
68Schmidt, exeg. Beiträge, 1, 152 ff.↑
68Schmidt, exeg. Beiträge, 1, 152 ff.↑
69This is shown in opposition to Olshausen by Steudel in Bengel’s Archiv. vii. ii. 425 f. viii. iii. 487.↑
69This is shown in opposition to Olshausen by Steudel in Bengel’s Archiv. vii. ii. 425 f. viii. iii. 487.↑
70Schmidt, ut sup. p. 156.↑
70Schmidt, ut sup. p. 156.↑
71Babylon. Sanhedr. f. cvii. 2, ap. Lightfoot, p. 207. Comp. Schöttgen, ii. p. 533. According to Josephus Antiq. xiii. xiii. 5, xiv. 2, they were Jews of each sex and of all ages, and chiefly Pharisees.↑
71Babylon. Sanhedr. f. cvii. 2, ap. Lightfoot, p. 207. Comp. Schöttgen, ii. p. 533. According to Josephus Antiq. xiii. xiii. 5, xiv. 2, they were Jews of each sex and of all ages, and chiefly Pharisees.↑
72Joseph. B. J. i. xxx. 3. Comp. Antiq. xvii. iv. 1.↑
72Joseph. B. J. i. xxx. 3. Comp. Antiq. xvii. iv. 1.↑
73Macrob. Saturnal. ii. 4:Quum audisset (Augustus) inter pueros, quos in Syriâ Herodes rex Judæorum intra bimatum jussit interfici, filium quoque ejus occisum, ait: melius est, Herodis porcum (ὗν) esse quam filium (υἱόν).↑
73Macrob. Saturnal. ii. 4:Quum audisset (Augustus) inter pueros, quos in Syriâ Herodes rex Judæorum intra bimatum jussit interfici, filium quoque ejus occisum, ait: melius est, Herodis porcum (ὗν) esse quam filium (υἱόν).↑
74Vid. Wetstein, Kuinöl, Olshausen in loc. Winer d. A. Herodes.↑
74Vid. Wetstein, Kuinöl, Olshausen in loc. Winer d. A. Herodes.↑
75Fritzsche, Comm. in Matt., p. 93 f.↑
75Fritzsche, Comm. in Matt., p. 93 f.↑
76Chrysostom and others.↑
76Chrysostom and others.↑
77Vid. Gratz, Comm. zum Ev. Matth. 1, s. 115.↑
77Vid. Gratz, Comm. zum Ev. Matth. 1, s. 115.↑
78Kuinöl, ad Matth. p. 44 f.↑
78Kuinöl, ad Matth. p. 44 f.↑
79Wetstein, in loc.↑
79Wetstein, in loc.↑
80Schneckenburger, Beiträge zur Einleitung in das N. T., s. 42.↑
80Schneckenburger, Beiträge zur Einleitung in das N. T., s. 42.↑
81Gieseler, Studien und Kritiken, 1831, 3. Heft, s. 588 f. Fritzsche, s. 104. Comp. Hieron. ad Jesai. xi. 1.↑
81Gieseler, Studien und Kritiken, 1831, 3. Heft, s. 588 f. Fritzsche, s. 104. Comp. Hieron. ad Jesai. xi. 1.↑
82For both these explanations, see Kuinöl, in loc.↑
82For both these explanations, see Kuinöl, in loc.↑
83Kepler, in various treatises; Münter, der Stern der Weisen; Ideler, Handbuch der mathemat. und technischen Chronologie, 2. Bd. s. 399 ff.↑
83Kepler, in various treatises; Münter, der Stern der Weisen; Ideler, Handbuch der mathemat. und technischen Chronologie, 2. Bd. s. 399 ff.↑
84Olshausen, s. 67.↑
84Olshausen, s. 67.↑
85Paulus, ut sup. s. 202, 221.↑
85Paulus, ut sup. s. 202, 221.↑
86Bengel’s Archiv. vii. ii. p. 424.↑
86Bengel’s Archiv. vii. ii. p. 424.↑
87At a later period, it is true, this journey of Jesus was the occasion of calumnies from the Jews, but those were of an entirely different nature, as will be seen in the following chapter.↑
87At a later period, it is true, this journey of Jesus was the occasion of calumnies from the Jews, but those were of an entirely different nature, as will be seen in the following chapter.↑
88Ueber formelle oder genetische Erklärungsart der Wunder. In Henke’s Museum, 1, 3, 399 ff. Similar essays see in the Abhandlungen über die beiden ersten Kapitel des Matthäus u. Lukas, in Henke’s Magazin, 5, 1, 171 ff., and in Matthäi, Religionsgl. der Apostel, 2, s. 422 ff.↑
88Ueber formelle oder genetische Erklärungsart der Wunder. In Henke’s Museum, 1, 3, 399 ff. Similar essays see in the Abhandlungen über die beiden ersten Kapitel des Matthäus u. Lukas, in Henke’s Magazin, 5, 1, 171 ff., and in Matthäi, Religionsgl. der Apostel, 2, s. 422 ff.↑
89L. J. Ch., s. 29 ff.↑
89L. J. Ch., s. 29 ff.↑
90Orig. c. Cels. i. 60. Auctor, op. imperf. in Matth. ap. Fabricius Pseudepigr. V. T., p. 807 ff.↑
90Orig. c. Cels. i. 60. Auctor, op. imperf. in Matth. ap. Fabricius Pseudepigr. V. T., p. 807 ff.↑
91Schmidt’s Bibliothek, 3, 1, s. 130.↑
91Schmidt’s Bibliothek, 3, 1, s. 130.↑
92In loc. Num. (Schöttgen, horæ, ii. p. 152):Multi Interpretati sunt hæc de Messiâ.↑
92In loc. Num. (Schöttgen, horæ, ii. p. 152):Multi Interpretati sunt hæc de Messiâ.↑
93Justin,Hist. 37.↑
93Justin,Hist. 37.↑
94Sueton. Jul. Cæs. 88.↑
94Sueton. Jul. Cæs. 88.↑
95Jalkut Rubeni, f. xxxii. 3 (ap. Wetstein):quâ horâ natus est Abrahamus, pater noster, super quem sit pax, stetit quoddam sidus in oriente et deglutivit quatuor astra, quæ erant in quatuor cœli plagis. According to an Arabic writing entitled Maallem, this star, prognosticating the birth of Abraham, was seen by Nimrod in a dream. Fabric. Cod. pseudepigr. V. T. i. s. 345.↑
95Jalkut Rubeni, f. xxxii. 3 (ap. Wetstein):quâ horâ natus est Abrahamus, pater noster, super quem sit pax, stetit quoddam sidus in oriente et deglutivit quatuor astra, quæ erant in quatuor cœli plagis. According to an Arabic writing entitled Maallem, this star, prognosticating the birth of Abraham, was seen by Nimrod in a dream. Fabric. Cod. pseudepigr. V. T. i. s. 345.↑
96Testamentum XII. Patriarcharum, test. Levi, 18 (Fabric. Cod. pseud. V. T. p. 584 f.):καὶ ἀνατελεῖ ἄστρον αὐτοῦ(of the Messianicἱερεὺς καινὸς)ἐν οὐρανῷ,—φωτίζον φῶς γνώσεως κ.τ.λ.Pesikta Sotarta, f. xlviii. 1 (ap. Schöttgen, ii. p. 531):Et prodibit stella ab oriente, quæ est stella Messiæ, et in oriente versabitur dies X V. Comp. Sohar Genes. f. 74. Schöttgen, ii. 524, and some other passages which are pointed out by Ideler in the Handbuch der Chronologie, 2 Bd. s. 409, Anm. 1, and Bertholdt, Christologia Judæorum, § 14.↑
96Testamentum XII. Patriarcharum, test. Levi, 18 (Fabric. Cod. pseud. V. T. p. 584 f.):καὶ ἀνατελεῖ ἄστρον αὐτοῦ(of the Messianicἱερεὺς καινὸς)ἐν οὐρανῷ,—φωτίζον φῶς γνώσεως κ.τ.λ.Pesikta Sotarta, f. xlviii. 1 (ap. Schöttgen, ii. p. 531):Et prodibit stella ab oriente, quæ est stella Messiæ, et in oriente versabitur dies X V. Comp. Sohar Genes. f. 74. Schöttgen, ii. 524, and some other passages which are pointed out by Ideler in the Handbuch der Chronologie, 2 Bd. s. 409, Anm. 1, and Bertholdt, Christologia Judæorum, § 14.↑
97Compare with the passages cited Note 7. Protevang. Jac. cap. xxi.:εἴδομεν ἀστέρα παμμεγέθη, λάμψαντα ἐν τοῖς ἄστροις τοὺτοις καὶ ἀμβλύνοντα αὐτοὺς τοῦ φαίνειν. Still more exaggerated in Ignat. ep. ad Ephes. 19. See the collection of passages connected with this subject in Thilo, cod. apocr. i. p. 390 f.↑
97Compare with the passages cited Note 7. Protevang. Jac. cap. xxi.:εἴδομεν ἀστέρα παμμεγέθη, λάμψαντα ἐν τοῖς ἄστροις τοὺτοις καὶ ἀμβλύνοντα αὐτοὺς τοῦ φαίνειν. Still more exaggerated in Ignat. ep. ad Ephes. 19. See the collection of passages connected with this subject in Thilo, cod. apocr. i. p. 390 f.↑
98Exeg. Beiträge, i. s. 159 ff.↑
98Exeg. Beiträge, i. s. 159 ff.↑
99Fritzsche in the paraphrase of chap. ii.Etiam stella, quam judaica disciplina sub Messiæ natale visum iri dicit, quo Jesus nascebatur tempore exorta est.↑
99Fritzsche in the paraphrase of chap. ii.Etiam stella, quam judaica disciplina sub Messiæ natale visum iri dicit, quo Jesus nascebatur tempore exorta est.↑
100As inMatt. ii. 11it is said of the magiτροσήνενκαν αὐτῷ—χρυσὸν καὶ λίβανον: so inIsa. lx. 6(LXX.):ἥξουσί, φέροντες χρυσίον, καὶ λίβανον οἴσουσι. The third present is in Matt.σμύρνα, in Isa.λίθος τίμιος.↑
100As inMatt. ii. 11it is said of the magiτροσήνενκαν αὐτῷ—χρυσὸν καὶ λίβανον: so inIsa. lx. 6(LXX.):ἥξουσί, φέροντες χρυσίον, καὶ λίβανον οἴσουσι. The third present is in Matt.σμύρνα, in Isa.λίθος τίμιος.↑
101V. 1.und3:כִּי בָא אוֹרֵךְ וּכְבוֹד יהוָֹה עָלַיִךְ(LXX:Ἰερουσαλὴμ)קוּמִי אוֹרִי זָרָח:—וְהָלְכוּ גּוֹיִם לְאוֹרֵךְ וּמְלָכִים לְנֹגַהּ זָרְחֵךְ↑
101V. 1.und3:כִּי בָא אוֹרֵךְ וּכְבוֹד יהוָֹה עָלַיִךְ(LXX:Ἰερουσαλὴμ)קוּמִי אוֹרִי זָרָח:—וְהָלְכוּ גּוֹיִם לְאוֹרֵךְ וּמְלָכִים לְנֹגַהּ זָרְחֵךְ↑
102Æneid, ii. 693 ff.↑
102Æneid, ii. 693 ff.↑
103Wetstein, in loc.↑
103Wetstein, in loc.↑
104Herod, i. 108 ff. Liv. i. 4.↑
104Herod, i. 108 ff. Liv. i. 4.↑
105Octav. 94:—ante paucos quam nasceretur menses prodigium Romæ factum publice, quo denuntiabatur, regem populi Romani naturam parturire. Senatum exterritum, censuisse, ne quis illo anno genitus educaretur. Eos, qui gravidas uxores haberent, quo ad se quisque spem traheret, curasse, ne Senatus consultum ad ærarium deferretur.↑
105Octav. 94:—ante paucos quam nasceretur menses prodigium Romæ factum publice, quo denuntiabatur, regem populi Romani naturam parturire. Senatum exterritum, censuisse, ne quis illo anno genitus educaretur. Eos, qui gravidas uxores haberent, quo ad se quisque spem traheret, curasse, ne Senatus consultum ad ærarium deferretur.↑
106Bauer (über das Mythische in der früheren Lebensper. des Moses, in the n. Theol.[176]Journ. 13, 3) had already compared the marvellous deliverance of Moses with that of Cyrus and Romulus; the comparison of the infanticides was added by De Wette, Kritik der Mos. Geschichte, s. 176.↑
106Bauer (über das Mythische in der früheren Lebensper. des Moses, in the n. Theol.[176]Journ. 13, 3) had already compared the marvellous deliverance of Moses with that of Cyrus and Romulus; the comparison of the infanticides was added by De Wette, Kritik der Mos. Geschichte, s. 176.↑
107Joseph. Antiq. ii. ix. 2.↑
107Joseph. Antiq. ii. ix. 2.↑
108Jalkut Rubeni (cont. of the passage cited in Note 6):dixerunt sapientes Nimrodi: natus est Tharæ filius hâc ipsâ horâ, ex quo egressurus est populus, qui hæreditabit præsens et futurum seculum; si tibi placuerit, detur patri ipsius domus argento auroque plena, et occidat ipsum. Comp. the passage of the Arabic book quoted by Fabric. Cod. pseudepigr. ut sup.↑
108Jalkut Rubeni (cont. of the passage cited in Note 6):dixerunt sapientes Nimrodi: natus est Tharæ filius hâc ipsâ horâ, ex quo egressurus est populus, qui hæreditabit præsens et futurum seculum; si tibi placuerit, detur patri ipsius domus argento auroque plena, et occidat ipsum. Comp. the passage of the Arabic book quoted by Fabric. Cod. pseudepigr. ut sup.↑
109Protev. Jacobi, c. xxii. f.↑
109Protev. Jacobi, c. xxii. f.↑
110Ex. iv. 19, LXX:βάδιζε, ἄπελθε εἰς Αἴγυπτον, τεθνήκασι γὰρ πάντες οἱ ζητοῦντές σου τὴν ψυχὴν.Matt. ii. 20:ἐγερθεὶς—πορεύου εἰς γῆν Ἰσραήλ· τεθνήκασι γὰρ οἱ ζητοῦντες τὴν ψυχὴν τοῦ παιδίου.We may remark that the inappropriate use of the plural in the evangelical passage, can only be explained on the supposition of a reference to the passage in Exod. See Winer, N. T. Gramm. s. 149. Comp. alsoExod. iv. 20withMatt. ii. 14,21.↑
110
Ex. iv. 19, LXX:βάδιζε, ἄπελθε εἰς Αἴγυπτον, τεθνήκασι γὰρ πάντες οἱ ζητοῦντές σου τὴν ψυχὴν.Matt. ii. 20:ἐγερθεὶς—πορεύου εἰς γῆν Ἰσραήλ· τεθνήκασι γὰρ οἱ ζητοῦντες τὴν ψυχὴν τοῦ παιδίου.
βάδιζε, ἄπελθε εἰς Αἴγυπτον, τεθνήκασι γὰρ πάντες οἱ ζητοῦντές σου τὴν ψυχὴν.
ἐγερθεὶς—πορεύου εἰς γῆν Ἰσραήλ· τεθνήκασι γὰρ οἱ ζητοῦντες τὴν ψυχὴν τοῦ παιδίου.
We may remark that the inappropriate use of the plural in the evangelical passage, can only be explained on the supposition of a reference to the passage in Exod. See Winer, N. T. Gramm. s. 149. Comp. alsoExod. iv. 20withMatt. ii. 14,21.↑
111Vide e.g. Schöttgen, Horæ, ii. p. 209.↑
111Vide e.g. Schöttgen, Horæ, ii. p. 209.↑
112Theile, zurBiographieJesu, § 15, Anm. 9. Hoffmann, s. 269.↑
112Theile, zurBiographieJesu, § 15, Anm. 9. Hoffmann, s. 269.↑
113Comp. my Streitschriften, i. 1, s. 42 f.; George, s. 39.↑
113Comp. my Streitschriften, i. 1, s. 42 f.; George, s. 39.↑
114Neander, L. J. Ch. s. 27.↑
114Neander, L. J. Ch. s. 27.↑
115Schleiermacher (Ueber den Lukas, s. 47), explains the narrative concerning the magi as a symbolical one; but he scorns to take into consideration the passages from the O. T. and other writings, which have a bearing on the subject, and by way of retribution, his exposition at one time rests in generalities, at another, takes a wrong path.↑
115Schleiermacher (Ueber den Lukas, s. 47), explains the narrative concerning the magi as a symbolical one; but he scorns to take into consideration the passages from the O. T. and other writings, which have a bearing on the subject, and by way of retribution, his exposition at one time rests in generalities, at another, takes a wrong path.↑
116Lightfoot, Horæ, p. 202.↑
116Lightfoot, Horæ, p. 202.↑
117Schneckenburger, Ueber den Ursprung des ersten kanonischen Evangeliums, s. 69 ff.↑
117Schneckenburger, Ueber den Ursprung des ersten kanonischen Evangeliums, s. 69 ff.↑
118Thus, e.g. Augustin de consensu evangelistarum, ii. 5. Storr, opusc. acad. iii. s. 96 ff. Süskind, inBengel’sArchiv. i. 1, s. 216 ff.↑
118Thus, e.g. Augustin de consensu evangelistarum, ii. 5. Storr, opusc. acad. iii. s. 96 ff. Süskind, inBengel’sArchiv. i. 1, s. 216 ff.↑
119E.g. Hess, Geschichte Jesu, 1, s. 51 ff. Paulus, Olshausen, in loc.↑
119E.g. Hess, Geschichte Jesu, 1, s. 51 ff. Paulus, Olshausen, in loc.↑
120Süskind, ut sup. s. 222.↑
120Süskind, ut sup. s. 222.↑
121The same difference as to the chronological relation of the two incidents exists between the two different texts of the apocryphal book: Historia de nativitate Mariæ et de inf. Serv., see Thilo, p. 385, not.↑
121The same difference as to the chronological relation of the two incidents exists between the two different texts of the apocryphal book: Historia de nativitate Mariæ et de inf. Serv., see Thilo, p. 385, not.↑
122This incompatibility of the two narratives was perceived at an early period by some opponents of Christianity. Epiphanius names one Philosabbatius, together with Celsus and Porphyry (hæres. li. 8).↑
122This incompatibility of the two narratives was perceived at an early period by some opponents of Christianity. Epiphanius names one Philosabbatius, together with Celsus and Porphyry (hæres. li. 8).↑
123Neander, L. J. Ch. s. 33, Anm.↑
123Neander, L. J. Ch. s. 33, Anm.↑
124Schleiermacher, Ueber den Lukas, s. 47. Schneckenburger, ut sup.↑
124Schleiermacher, Ueber den Lukas, s. 47. Schneckenburger, ut sup.↑
125Antiq. xiv. ix. 4, xv. i. 1 and x. 4.↑
125Antiq. xiv. ix. 4, xv. i. 1 and x. 4.↑
126The Evang.Nicodemi indeed calls him, c. xvi.ὁ μέγας διδάσκαλος, and the Protev. Jacobi, c. xxiv. makes him a priest or even high priest, vid. Varr. ap. Thilo Cod. Apocr. N. T. 1, s. 271, comp. 203.↑
126The Evang.Nicodemi indeed calls him, c. xvi.ὁ μέγας διδάσκαλος, and the Protev. Jacobi, c. xxiv. makes him a priest or even high priest, vid. Varr. ap. Thilo Cod. Apocr. N. T. 1, s. 271, comp. 203.↑
1271 Th. s. 205 ff.↑
1271 Th. s. 205 ff.↑
128Cap. vi.Viditque illum Simeon senex instar columnæ lucis refulgentem, cum Domina Maria virgo, mater ejus, ulnis suis eum gestaret,—et circumdabant eum angeli instar circuli, celebrantes illum, etc. Ap. Thilo, p. 71.↑
128Cap. vi.Viditque illum Simeon senex instar columnæ lucis refulgentem, cum Domina Maria virgo, mater ejus, ulnis suis eum gestaret,—et circumdabant eum angeli instar circuli, celebrantes illum, etc. Ap. Thilo, p. 71.↑
129Thus E. F. in the treatise, on the two first chapters ofMatth.andLuke.In Henke’s Mag. 5 bd. s. 169 f. A similar half measure is in Matthäi, Synopse der 4 Evan. s. 3, 5 f.↑
129Thus E. F. in the treatise, on the two first chapters ofMatth.andLuke.In Henke’s Mag. 5 bd. s. 169 f. A similar half measure is in Matthäi, Synopse der 4 Evan. s. 3, 5 f.↑
130With the words of Simeon addressed to Mary:καὶ σοῦ δὲ αὐτῆς τὴν ψυχὲν διελεύσεται ῥομφαία(v. 35) comp. the words in the messianic psalm of sorrow,xxii. 21:ῥῦσαι ἀπὸ ῥομφαίας τὴν ψυχέν μου.↑
130With the words of Simeon addressed to Mary:καὶ σοῦ δὲ αὐτῆς τὴν ψυχὲν διελεύσεται ῥομφαία(v. 35) comp. the words in the messianic psalm of sorrow,xxii. 21:ῥῦσαι ἀπὸ ῥομφαίας τὴν ψυχέν μου.↑
131Schleiermacher, Ueber den Lukas, s. 37. Compare on the other hand the observations in § 18, with those of the authors there quoted, Note 19.↑
131Schleiermacher, Ueber den Lukas, s. 37. Compare on the other hand the observations in § 18, with those of the authors there quoted, Note 19.↑
132Neander here (s. 24 f.) mistakes the apocryphal for the mythical, as he had before done the poetical.↑
132Neander here (s. 24 f.) mistakes the apocryphal for the mythical, as he had before done the poetical.↑
133Olshausen, bibl. Comm. 1. s. 142 f.↑
133Olshausen, bibl. Comm. 1. s. 142 f.↑
134Dial. c. Trypho, 78: Joseph came from Nazareth,where he lived, to Bethlehem,whence he was, to be enrolled,ἀνεληλύθει(Ἰωσὴφ)ἀπὸ Ναζαρὲτ, ἔνθα ὤκει, εἰς Βηθλεὲμ, ὅθεν ἦν, ἀπογράψασθαι. The wordsὅθεν ἦνmight however be understood as signifying merely the place of his tribe, especially if Justin’s addition be considered:For his race was of the tribe of Judah, which inhabits that land,ἀπο γὰρ τῆς κατοικούσης τὴν γῆν ἐκείνην φυλῆς Ἰούδα τὸ γένος ἦν.↑
134Dial. c. Trypho, 78: Joseph came from Nazareth,where he lived, to Bethlehem,whence he was, to be enrolled,ἀνεληλύθει(Ἰωσὴφ)ἀπὸ Ναζαρὲτ, ἔνθα ὤκει, εἰς Βηθλεὲμ, ὅθεν ἦν, ἀπογράψασθαι. The wordsὅθεν ἦνmight however be understood as signifying merely the place of his tribe, especially if Justin’s addition be considered:For his race was of the tribe of Judah, which inhabits that land,ἀπο γὰρ τῆς κατοικούσης τὴν γῆν ἐκείνην φυλῆς Ἰούδα τὸ γένος ἦν.↑
135Beiträge zur Einleit. in das N. T. 1. s. 217. Comp. Hoffmann, s. 238 f. 277 ff.↑
135Beiträge zur Einleit. in das N. T. 1. s. 217. Comp. Hoffmann, s. 238 f. 277 ff.↑
136C. I. 8. 10.↑
136C. I. 8. 10.↑
137Paulus, exeg. Handb. 1, a, s. 178.↑
137Paulus, exeg. Handb. 1, a, s. 178.↑
138Ueber die Unzulässigkeit der mythischen Auffassung u. s. f. 1, s. 101.↑
138Ueber die Unzulässigkeit der mythischen Auffassung u. s. f. 1, s. 101.↑
139L. J. Ch. s. 33.↑
139L. J. Ch. s. 33.↑
140Tertull. adv. Marcion iv. 8. Epiphan. hær. xxix. 1.↑
140Tertull. adv. Marcion iv. 8. Epiphan. hær. xxix. 1.↑
141Comp K. Ch. L. Schmidt, in Schmidt’s Bibliothek, 3, 1, s. 123 f.; Kaiser, bibl. Theol. 1, s. 230.↑
141Comp K. Ch. L. Schmidt, in Schmidt’s Bibliothek, 3, 1, s. 123 f.; Kaiser, bibl. Theol. 1, s. 230.↑
142On this Heydenreich rests his defence, Ueber die Unzulässigkeit. 1. s. 99.↑
142On this Heydenreich rests his defence, Ueber die Unzulässigkeit. 1. s. 99.↑
143Ueber den Lukas, s. 49. There is a similar hesitation in Thelte, Biographie Jesu, § 15.↑
143Ueber den Lukas, s. 49. There is a similar hesitation in Thelte, Biographie Jesu, § 15.↑
144Ueber den Ursprung u. s. w., s. 68 f. u. s. 158.↑
144Ueber den Ursprung u. s. w., s. 68 f. u. s. 158.↑
145Comp. Ammon. Fortbildung, 1, s. 194 ff.; De Wette, exeget. Handb. 1, 2, s. 24 f.; George, s. 84 ff. That different narrators may give different explanations of the same fact, and that these different explanations may afterwards be united in one book, is proved by many examples in the O. T. Thus in Genesis, three derivations are given of the name of Isaac; two of that of Jacob (xxv. 26.,xxvii. 16), and so of Edom and Beersheba (xxi. 31.,xxvi. 33). Comp. De Wette, Kritik der mos. Gesch., s. 110. 118 ff. and my Streitschriften, I, 1, s. 83 ff.↑
145Comp. Ammon. Fortbildung, 1, s. 194 ff.; De Wette, exeget. Handb. 1, 2, s. 24 f.; George, s. 84 ff. That different narrators may give different explanations of the same fact, and that these different explanations may afterwards be united in one book, is proved by many examples in the O. T. Thus in Genesis, three derivations are given of the name of Isaac; two of that of Jacob (xxv. 26.,xxvii. 16), and so of Edom and Beersheba (xxi. 31.,xxvi. 33). Comp. De Wette, Kritik der mos. Gesch., s. 110. 118 ff. and my Streitschriften, I, 1, s. 83 ff.↑