Obrazy na stronie

Observations on the


genealogy of our Lord.





Jeremiah the prophet, and Baruch the son of Neriah, Jer. || Jehoiada the priest, removed Athaliah-out of the way, set xliii. 5—7. 3. The words of Jer. xlv. 4, 5. “The Lord saith, Joash at last on the throne, according to the particular acBehold that which I have built I will break down, and that count in 2 Chron. xxii. 23. From that time, the wealth and which I have planted will I pluck up; and seekest thou great dignity of this family increased, till the whole line of Solothings for thyself? seek them not, for I will bring evil upon mon becoming extinct, Jechonias, bis only remaining heir, all flesh, &c." Here it is evident the threatening is directed took Susanna, the daughter of Neriah, to wife: to which against the house of David; (2 Sam. vii. 16. 1 Chron. xvii. circumstance, Dr. B. thinks the author of Psalm cxxxii. 17. 25.) and the great things which Baruch sought for himself, probably alludes : “ There will I make the horn of David lo were certainly a share in the government of the land, as be- bud : I have ordained a lamp (that is, Neri) for mine anointing nearly allied to the throne ; or even the throne itself. ed.” Here Dr. B. plays a little on the original word 7 ner, 4. Add to this, that the Jews alledged as a charge against a lamp ; and as yng Neri signifies my lamp, and 1993 Neriah Baruch, that by his instigation, Jeremiah exhorted them ra- the lamp of the Lord, he seems to think this a prophetical dether to continue under the power of the Chaldeans, thanclaration of the preservation of the seed royal in the person escape to Egypt, Jer. xliii. 3. which seems strongly to inti- of Neriah, the direct ancestor of Christ. Supposing this hy. mate, that he expected to exercise the regal power over the pothesis to be true, Dr. B. constructs his genealogical table remaining Jews, by the assistance of the Chaldeans, which in the following manner, beginning at the division of the line he could not expect to maintain in Egypt. From all these of Solomon, and omitting Melea and Mainan, for reasons considerations, Dr. B. infers, that Baruch, and consequently that have been already assigned. Neriah, sprang from Nathan, the son of David.


NATHAN As nothing is related of the ancestors of Neriah, Dr. B. is obliged to recur to conjectures; the chief of which are the

2 Rehoboam

2 Mattatha following. “ Maaseiah or Melchi, the father of Neriah, was 3 Abiah

Eliakim probably the same who, during the reign of Josiah, was go


Jonan zernor of the city, 2 Chron. xxxiv. 8. whom the Syriac calls

5 Jehosaphat

5 Joseph 6 Jehoram

6 the scribe, and the Arabic the teacher of the city. Probably

Judah or Adaiah 7 Ahaziah

7 Simeon or Maaseiah also, Simeon, the son of Juda, (Luke iii. 30.) is the same as

8 Joash

Levi is called Maaseiah, the son of Adaiah, 2 Chron. xxiii. 1. 9 Amaziah


Matthat Simeon and Maaseiak, (Dr. B. observes) are written in nearly 10 Uzziah

10 Jorim 11 Jotham

11 Eliezer the same letters, and differ scarcely, except in their situation.

12 Ahaz


Jose As to the nanies of Adaiah and Juda, the difference is nearly

13 Hezekiah

13 Er the same with that already observed between Obadiah and Manasses

14 Elmodam Juda, Luke iii. 26.” That the names in the Old Testament, 15 Amon

15 Cosam have been extremely corrupted, not only in the different trans

16 Josias

16 Addi

17 lations throngh which the Sacred Writings have passed, but


17 Melchi or Maaseias 18 Jehoiachin or Jecho

Neri also in various copies of the original, is well known to every


19 Susanna biblical critic, and has been continually deplored, from the days of St. Jerom, to the present hour. The complaint of On the ancestors of Mary, and the consanguinity between her this father, in his comment on Ezekiel xl. 7. is as follows: and Joseph, Dr. B. shews that the Virgin descended, not from Statim mensus est limen portæ quod LXX. @:t nominant, pro the tribe of Levi, (an opinion which some of the ancients quo in Hebræo scriptum est qu Seph ; et diligentem et studiosum embraced) but from the family of David ; and brings several lectorem admonendum puto-ut sciat omnia propè verba Hebra- additional arguments, to prove that St. Luke's professed obica et nomina quæ in Græca et Latina translatione sunt posita, lject was to trace out the genealogy of Mary, and St. Matnimia vetustate corrupta scriptorumque vitio depravata, et dumthew's that of Joseph. de inemendatis scribuntur inemendatiora, de verbis Hebraicis According to the universal voice of antiquity, the father facta esse sarmatica, imò nullius gentis, dum et Hebræa esse and the mother of the Virgin were called Joachim and Anna. desierint, et aliena esse non cæperint. Hieron. Opera, vol. iji. Dr. B. thinks it indisputable, that Joachim is the same name col. 981. edit. Martinay.

with Eli, Luke iji. 23. or Eliakim, 2 Chron. xxxvi. 4. To Dr. B. thinks, that if the above hypothesis be allowed as give a greater probability to the opinion that Luke delivers probable, it will follow, that the family of Nathan was con the gencalogy of Mary, Dr. B. refers to those Jewish writcealed in a humble and obscure situation, until almost the ings, quoted by Lightfoot, in which the mother of our Lord whole race of Solomon was destroyed by the treachery of is called by na D' Mary the daughter of Eli; and though Athaliah. Mauseiah or Simeon, the prince of this family, the latter word is written by instead of use this does not, in fearing a similar destruction, and being moved with pity to his opinion, tend to invalidate the argument, as * and rare wards his relative Joash, and having, by the assistance of frequently interchanged. It may therefore be taken for



Observations on the


genealogy of our Lord.

opus, married


granted, that Eli was the father of Mary, and maternal grand Kawa, the daughter, not the wife, of Cleopas. Calmet, in father of Christ, and that he is considered by St. Luke as the || his comment on John xix. 25. gives it as the most plausible real father of Clarist, while Joseph is only the putative father ; opinion, that Cleopas was husband of that Mary who was and thus, Dr. B. thinks, his own exposition is not only con- | sister to the blessed Virgin, and father of James the less firmed, bat Luke is represented to be consistent with himself Dr. B. thinks that these apparently discordant systems may through the whole of his account: for in the same way asbe harmonized by the following seheme: Neri is said to be the father of Salathiel, though it is evident


JACOB he was no more than his maternal grandfather, so Eli would appear to be the maternal grandfather of Christ, although he is called his father. On the contrary, if the hypothesis of Cleopas died with- Joachim, or Eli, Africanus be adopted, the genealogy by St. Luke is self-con- out issue ; from married the second tradictory. Dr. B. next takes into consideration, the family the marriage of time to Anna, from of Anna, the mother of Mury. It is generally agreed, that

his widow with whom sprang Mary Joseph Alpheus or Cle

his brother Jonthe father of Ama was named Matthan : who this person was,

chimsprang Va

JESUS Mary , is not easy to be known. Sonne suppose him to have been a

Ty η του Κλαπα.

Κλωπα wlience priest; and as it was lawful for the daughters of the priests

sprang James, 10 marry into any tribe, (Lev. xxii. 12.) we may perceive

Joses, Simon, how Mary could be the cousin (ovyysuns) of Elizabeth, (who

and Juda. was really of the tribe of Levi) though her father Joachim

By this hypothesis it would appear, that there were two or Eli, was a descendant of the tribe of Judah.

persons of the naine of Cleopas, one the broiler of Joachim, From considering the family of Anna, the Virgin's mother, the other the brother of Joseph ; one the legal father, the Dr. B. proceeds to the family of Joachim; but in this exami- | other the husband of Mary. Hence James and the others nation, he finds very few documents to guide his inquiries. | are properly termed the brethren of our Lord, being connectAncient writers, in order to prove that Mary sprang from ed with him by a twofold tie of consanguinity-on their moDavid, invented two names, Panther and Barpanther, as the ther's side, and on the side of their putative father. Secondgrandfather and father of Joachim. Concerning this fabu- ly, By this hypothesis, the difficulty of regarding these four ious Panther, there are two hy, otheses: one is, that Panther brothers as the sons of Joseph, is quite removed : if this inwas the surname of Jacob, the father of Joseph ; and this was deed were true, they would not be the sons of Mary sov K22the opinion of Epiphanius. Others have maintained that he ma, for Joseph would then have been the husband of the two was of the family of Nathan, and brother of Melchi': this sisters, contrary to the law, Lev. xviii. 18. Cleopas or Alhypothesis is delivered by Damascenus, who appears to have pheus, according to Grotius and Lucas Brugensis, is the same found it in Epiphanius. Leaving all these precarious and with Kawa, (John xix. 25.) who was alive when Christ was forged authorities, Dr. B. thinks that the family of Joachim crucified. Hence it is improbable that James, Joses, Simon is more likely to be ascertained, by inquiring among the and Judas, could have been born of his wife, by any marbrethren of our Lord, mentioned Matt. xiii. 55. and Mark vi. riage of her with Joseph. We have already seen from Hege3.-James, Joses, Simon, and Judas. Concerning these, there sippus, that the grandchildren of this very Jude, who was have been two opinions: 1. That they were the sons of Jo- called our Lord's brother, were alive in the time of Domitian : seph by a former wife, which Origen, Epiphanius, and Theo- || he expressly says, that “ Simon, the son of Cleopas, who phylact seem to have believed, and Jerom has opposed with was uncle to our Lord, was crucified in the 120th year of his considerable asperity. (See his books De viris illustribus et age, under the reign of Trajan, when Atticus, of the conadversus Helvidium.) Jerom's hypothesis, on the contrary, sular order, was president of Syria.” See Euseb. Hist. Eccl. is that James, Joses, Simon, and Judas, were cousins of our || 1. iji. c. 32. Simon must therefore have been born before Lord, being the sons of Mary, the wife of Alpheus and sister Christ, for Trajan, in whose reign he suffered, died A. D. to the Virgin, who is called Magia na sou Kawiu, Jolin xix. 25. 117. If therefore Joseph had ever married Mary tou Kaara, Dr. B. asserts, after Baronius and others, that James the Just, it inust have been before he espoused the mother of our the first bishop of the church at Jerusalem, was the same Lord : and then, as both these sisters were alive at the cruwho is called the brother of our Lord, and the son of Alpheus.cifixion, (Jolin xix. 25.) he must have been illicitly the hus.

Concerning Cleopas or Klopas, there are various opinions, band of both at the same time. both among ancient and modern writers. Hegesippus, as Dr. Barrett having thus finished his laborious investigation quoted by Eusebius, (Hist. Eccl. ). iii. c. 2.) calls him the of this difficult subject, concludes his work by observing, that brother of Joseph. Epiphanius, on the contrary, calls bim his prime object was to prove, by the agreement of the Evanthe brother of Joachim: Chrysostom is of the same opinion. gelists, that Christ descended from David by the line of SoloOthers make Cleopas and Alpheus the same person : and mon; that on this subject he has not assumed, that the exfirotius, following the Arabic version, understands by n tov | planation given of one or other of these genealogies is the Observations on the


genealogy of our Lord.

[ocr errors]

true one, and that the other should be corrected according to '| St. Luke, who have each of them given us a genealogy of it; but that, in the first place, he has considered the number our Lord, has greatly embarrassed the curious, and did so of the generations, and then, by assistance derived from the early; (see Aug. Retract. 1. ji. c. 7.) but as in other cases, what books of the Old Testament, the rules of sound and tem- was at first thought an objection against the sacred writer, has perate criticism, and the collation of MSS. has constructed turned out in his favour ; so doubly will this, when it shall be a genealogical table of the family of David; (see the preceding thoroughly cleared up. Time may perhaps do it: all I would leaf;) and having compared with this table the genealogies ex- attempt to shew here is, that there has been lately discovered tant in the Evangelists, he finds that they agree with it, in an inscription at Palmyra, which has just the same difficulty. the main, and consequently that they agree with each other. He that clears up the Syrian difficulty, will, I presume, clear It cannot be objected against his argument, that he takes for up the Sucred. To which I would ad, that it is to be regranted what he should have proved, viz, that one or other membered, that Palmyra was in the neighbourhood of Judea, of the genealogies is true; this he has not asserted, but he in and the inscriptions that are found there, are about the aposfers that both are authentie, from their agreement with that "tolic age. As to the inscription I refer to, Mr. Wood, the which he has constructed from the best existing authorities: ingenious editor of those ruins, who has observed, that it was and although he considers the hypothesis of the moderns, more difficult to understand than translate it. This, says he, will which states that Luke sets down the genealogy of Mary, to appear by rendering it literally, which is easiest done into Labe the inost probable, yet he has not assumed it as true; tin; thus: Senatus populusque Alialamenem, Pani filiam, Mo. neither do his conclusions against the hypothesis of Africanus, cimi nepotem, Æranis pronepotem, Muthæ abnepotem, et Ærain the second and third sections, rest on any such assump- nem patrem ejus, viros pios et patriæ amicos, et omni modo tion, but solely on the authority of the Old Testament and placentes patriæ patriisque diis, honoris gratia. Anno 450, a collation of MSS. anconnected with any hypothesis what. Mense Aprili. Our difficulty is, continues he, that ?Eranes is

called the father of Alialamenes, who is himself called the son All subjects of this kind, both in sacred and prophane his- of Panus, just in the same manner as St. Matthew tells us that tory, are entangled with difficulties peculiar to themselves, Jacob begat Joseph; and St. Luke calls Joseph, the son of Ileli. partly through the remoteness of the times to which they re- There is something without doubt in these affairs peculias fer, and partly through the peculiar munners that prevailed in to the East, which, however unknown to us, was common different nations, of reckoning and recording their genealogi- ' to the Jews and the people of Palmyra ; and will, when procal successions. I may venture to affirm that similar difti-, perly explained, be a proof of the authenticity of these genom culties, and even greater, are to be found in profane histories alogies, instead of an olsjection.” Ilarmer's Observations. of the first importance; the general accuracy and universal To several of my readers it will probably appear, that Dr. authenticity of wbich, no man who regards his credit will B. has carried his critical conjectures too far, particularly in trer call into question.

respect of several naines which occur in these genealogies. Dr. B. has certainly proved his main points without recur-Those only will make this objection, who, from a want of ring to the discreditable shifts, wbich some will adopt, who acquaintance with ancient MSS. suppose that those names, cut the knots they cannot untie ; and because they find it im- as they occur in our present copies, are to be considered as practicable to reconcile certain seeming difficulties in the sa- invariably genuine and original. But the specimen I have cred history, first affect to doubt the authenticity of those already given, in the preceding sheet, of the different reading of histories, and afterwards put forth their criminal hands, and the same name in ancient MSS. will serve to remove this misaplop off' whole branches from the tree of life:-a text is too prehension. From a very particular acquaintance with this small a portion ; difficulties (to them) still remain, another subject, I think I have sufficient ground to state, that, text must follow, and another still, till at last whole chapters through the ignorance and carelessness of transcribers, innuare tossed away into the limbo of vanity. Then, to be sure, anerable mistakes have been made in ancient names. These all is fair and clear; for by this species of criticism any thing also have suffered very greatly in their transfusion from one may be proved or denied : but God never appointed such a language to another, till at last the original name is almost method to discover truth, and sound criticism should hold it totally lost. Examples might be multiplied without end; a' disgraceful to resort to it.

very few will suffice: the www Yehoshua (according to the I have said that the peculiar manner used by some of the Masoretic punctuation) of the Ilebrew Bille, is changed into Eastern nations in recording their genealogies, is one cause of Joshua and Jesus; 1790 Yeshầyahoo into Isaiah and Esaias ; their present obscurity : on this subject, the late ingenious | 17098 Eliyahoo into Elijah and Elias : the Persian Daráb- into Mr. Harmer refers to a case in point, which I shall give in Darius ; Ardsheer into Ahasuerus; Artachshasta into Artabis own words :


and even Darius ; and yuanYuhchanan into Iwarens; Genealogical tables were kept among the Jews with great | Johannes, and John! Besides, neither the Greeks nor Romans exactness.

Every person of learning however knows, that could pronounce either the Hebrew or Persian names; and the great difference in this point between St. Matthew and when engaged in the task of transcribing, they did it according

Account of Christ's templation


in the wilderness,

to their own manner of pronunciation. It is notorious that sent by the use of additional letters, quia cum duplici aspiraall the Greek and Latin historians have committed innume- || tione in Græcam linguam transferre non poterunt, aliis litteris rable blunders of this kind, in their accounts of foreign na- || additis expresserunt : he adds, that, whereas the Greeks and tions. St. Jerom loudly complains of the ridicule which | Romans had only one s, the Hebrews had three, o samech those Christians, who were accustomed only to a Greek or X sade and u sin, each of which had a different sound. (Ubi Latin mode of pronunciation, endured continually from the supra.) From these examples, the Reader will see the inJews, because they could not pronounce the Hebrew proper | dubitable evidence of corruption in many proper names, and names, particularly the gutturals : “ Solent, (says he) irridere the great probability of it in others. nos imperitiæ maxime in aspirationibus &: quibusdam cum On the whole of this genealogy, a pious writer makes the rasura gulæ litteris proferendis ;-si igitur à nobis hæc nomi- 1 following reflections: -nun & linguæ idiomata ut videlicet barbara non ita fuerint Jesus, the Author and Principle of the new creation, expressa ut exprimuntur ab Hebræis, solent cuchinnum attollere, and the Repairer of the world, disdains not to be reckoned et jurare se penitus nescire quod dicimus.Com. in Epist. among ordinary creatures, and among the children of sinad. Tit. c. iii. v. 9. This learned father excuses himself and ful Adam. He designed hereby to secure us from having his brethren, on the consideration, that the Hebrews had the least doubt of his human nature; and to assure us, that both sounds and letters, which were wholly unknown to the we have a Victim, a Saviour, and a High-priest, capable of Greeks and Latins; and particularly instances a cheth, and compassionating our infirmities and miseries, and making v ayin, the double aspiration of which (as he terms it) the atonement for our sins; and thus reconciling us to God. Septuagint not being able to express, were obliged to repre- | Thanks be to God for his unspeakable gift!

A.M. 4031.
A. D. 27.

[ocr errors]

CCI. 3.


CHAPTER IV. Christ's temptation, 1–13. T'eaches in the synagogues of Galilee, 14, 15. He preaches in a synagogue at Nazareth, 16–28. They attempt to kill him, 29, 30. He preaches in Capernaum, 31, 32. and cas!s out a demon,

Heals Peter's mother-in-law, and various others, 38-41. He goes to the desart, and preaches afterwards in the synagogues of Galilee, 42—44.

ND Jesus being full of the || 4 And Jesus answered him, saying, 4.11.1981. An. Olymp. Holy Ghost returned from Jor- It is written, That man shall not live An. Clymp. dan, and was led

was led by the Spirit into by bread alone, but by every word of the wilderness,

God. 2 Being forty days tempted of the devil. 5 And the devil, taking him up into a high And in those days he did eat nothing: and mountain, shewed unto him all the kingdoms of when they were ended, he afterward hun-the world in a moment of time. gered.

6 And the devil said unto him, All this power 3 And the devil said unto him, If thou be the will I give thee, and the glory of them: for Son of God, command this stone that it be that is delivered unto me, and to whomsoever made bread.

I will I give it.

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small]


days and forty nights in which he is said to have been tempted Verse 1. Was led by the Spirit] Or, And was carried about, by the Devil, he is carried about, continually sustained and nyito. Matthew says, aungon, he was brought up. Mark says, supported by the Holy Ghost. Let those who are tempted the Spirit driveth him, exouno---putteth him forth. But each by Satan, look for, and in virtue of the power and interof the Evangelists attribute this to the Holy Ghost, not to cession of Christ, claim the same support; and it matters Satan.

little how many days they may be assaulted by the Devil, It may be useful to remark here, that during the forty!' while they are carried about by the Spirit of God.


Verse 7. If thou-wilt worship me] This temptation is the Verse 16. To Nazareth, where he had been brought up] It tust in order, as related by Matthew; and it is not reasonable is likely that our Lord lived principally in this city, till the to suppose that any other succeeded to it. Luke has here 30th year of his age; but after he entered on his public told the particulars, but not in the order in which they took ministry, his usual place of residence was at the house of place. See every circumstance of this temptation considered Peter, in Capernaum. and explained in the notes on Matt. iv. 14:11.

As his custom was) Our Lord regularly attended the publie Verse 14. Returned in the power of the Spirit] Ey in Suwepast worship of God in the synagogues ; for there the Scriptures Tou zveupdetos, in the mighty power of the Spirit. Having now were read—other parts of the worship were rery corrupt; but conquered the grand adversary, he comes in the miracle- it was the best at that time to be found in the land. To working energy of the Spirit to shew forth his power, god worship God publicly, is the duty of every man; and no man head, and love to the people, that they might believe and be can be guiltless who neglects it. If a person cannot get such saved. He who, through the grace of God, resists and over- public worship as he likes, let him frequent such as he can comes temptation, is always bettered by it. This is one of the get. Better to attend the most indifferent, than to stay at wonders of God's grace, that those very things which are de- home, especially on the Lord's day. The place and the time signed for our atter ruin, he makes the instruments of our are set apart for the worship of the true God: if others do greatest good. Thus Satan is ever duped by his own pro- not conduct themselves well in it, that is not your fault, and ceedings, and caught in his own craft.

need not be any hindrance to you. You come to worship Verse 15. And he taught in their synagogues] We do not

God--don't forget your errand and God will supply the find, that even the persecuting Jews ever hindered Christ or lack in the service by the teachings of his Spirit. Hear the his disciples from preaching in their synagogues. Is it the saying of old Mr. Herbert: gesig same in every place where even the Christian religion is esta- “ The worst speak something good : should all want sense, blished by law? Would Jesus, or his Apostles, or their most

God takes the text, and preacheth p-a-t-i-e-n-c-e." scriptural representatives, be permitted to preach in one out A man may always profit where the word of God is of a thousand churches, in certain countries, unless they were read. strictly conformed to their external ecclesiastical customs? Stood up for to read.] The Jews, in general, sat while they Nor even then, unless their doctrine were according to the taught or commented on the Sacred Writings, or the trataste of the managers and of the times.

ditions of the elders; but when they read either the Law or Glorified of all.] All felt the power of his preaching, and the Prophets, they invariably stood up : it was not lawful for acknowledged the divinity of his mission. The scandal of them even to lean against any thing while employed in the cross had not yet taken place.

« PoprzedniaDalej »