Down an Unfamiliar Road

NEW TESTAMENT CRITICAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWO

Part V (con’t)

Verses 21-23: “So Joseph took the child and His mother and went to Israel. But he heard that Archelaus was now king in Judea. Archelaus became king when his father Herod the Great died. So Joseph was afraid to go there. Then, after being warned in a dream, he returned to the area of Galilee. He went to the town of Nazareth and lived there. This helped people better understand what God was saying through the prophets. God said the Messiah would be called a Nazarene.”

This is one clue as to the dating of the current calendar, in that Herod Archelaus assumed the throne in 4 BC and lasted until 6 AD. Since he was the one who orchestrated the murder of the innocent in Bethlehem, that would make Jesus six years old, based on the Gregorian calendar. Since Jesus was approximately two when He was taken into Egypt, it’s hard to believe He lived there for four years. In any case, it gives us a clue as to the true age of Jesus. Since it was often normal procedure for any new king to take a census in order to determine his bases for taxation, and it was just such an ordered census that caused Joseph to go to Bethlehem, then our Lord may have been born closer to 4 BC than 1 AD.

This would also mean that instead of our Master being crucified on the cross at age thirty-three, it may have been closer to thirty-seven. But since He is from everlasting to everlasting, that counts for very little. Hearing that Herod Archelaus, the son of Herod the Great, was dead may have brought a sense of relief to Joseph down in Egypt, but finding out that his son Herod Antipas had taken over, did not bring him much joy. Josephus tells us that Archelaus was not much better than his father. But it was not an easy ride for Antipas because a revolt broke out shortly after he took the throne.

Matthew leaves no doubt that Joseph left Egypt and went to Galilee. So returning to Bethlehem in Judea was out of the question. Since we are told in Luke that Joseph and Mary were living in Nazareth when the angel Gabriel visited her, it would seem only natural that this would be Joseph’s choice. No doubt his house was still there as well as his carpentry business. Again, Matthew was a stickler for finding prophecies that pointed out specific aspects of the Messiah’s life and destiny. But there is much speculation as to which prophet Matthew was referring to who, that made any statement which could be construed as pertaining to Jesus being likened to a Nazarene. Some scholars believe that it is a play on words taken from Isaiah where the Hebrew word is ne’tser (branch), from which the word Nazarene comes, is found.¹

Another theory is that it is based on a messianic reference that states: “he grew up before him like a tender shoot.”² The Hebrew word for “shoot” is nasir, more similar to the word nazarene than nazirite. However, a Jewish translator believes that it is simply the wording that is misleading. It should read, “and settled in a town called Natzeret, so that what had been spoken by the prophets might be fulfilled, that he will be called a Natzrati.”³ Therefore, the idea that Jesus would fulfill the vow of a Nazarene was unlikely.⁴

After all, Matthew used the plural “prophets” in identifying the source of the quote. This would allow for taking a little here and a little there and putting it together. It is important to notice that Matthew did not say, “This is what God said,” but rather, “this is what God was saying” through the prophets. In other words, it was not a concrete statement but a general concept that he found throughout the writings of the prophets.

Another theory suggests that being called a “Nazarene” was intended as an insult. In other words, it was a derogatory reference to anyone born or raised in that small hamlet. The word is used precisely that way in the Gospel of John.⁵ With that being said, Jesus was certainly known and referred to often as Jesus of Nazareth. When Joseph arrived in Nazareth of Galilee, Herod Antipas, another of Herod’s sons, was tetrarch or governor. He was a milder person, and not so cruel and tyrannical as his brother Archelaus: besides, Galilee was an obscure place, where, Joseph might reasonably think, he should live with Mary and Jesus unobserved, and free from danger. While Joseph was certainly part of the action that led to them winding up in Nazareth, there is no doubt that it was all orchestrated by God to accomplish what had been foretold by the prophets, of which Matthew quoted Isaiah.⁶

In one Jewish Targum, the verse reads this way: “And a King will come out from the sons of Jesse, and from his children’s children the Messiah will be anointed.”⁷ Another Targum from the Aramaic text renders it: “And the staff merges from the trunk of Isaac,⁸ and the nugget branches out from its root; and there shall rest and settle upon him the Spirit of God, the Spirit of Wisdom and Knowledge, the Spirit of Providence and Greatness, the Spirit of Understanding and Submission to YaHWeH.⁹”¹⁰ Another rendering reads: “Then a shoot will spring from the stem of Jesse, and a branch from his roots will bear fruit.”¹¹ In Jonathan ben Uzziel’s Targum it reads: “And a King will rise from the sons of Jesse, and from his children’s children the Messiah shall be anointed.¹² So there was no doubt in the Jewish scholar’s mind that this prophecy pertained to the coming Messiah.

As far as Matthew was concerned, this prophecy was now fulfilled in Yeshua; since He was descended from Jesse’s family. Furthermore, by Him living in Nazareth, he would appear to be, and would be “called a Nazarene, or Netzer, the branch”; being an inhabitant of Natzareth, or Netzer, so called from the multitude of plants and trees that grew there. To better understand the term “Nazarene,” we turn to a Rabbi from a celebrated family which traced their origin to those Jews who were led into captivity after the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus and Vespasian. He received his first instruction from his father, who was a very eminent and literary man, and who initiated him in all the cycle of Biblical and Talmudic lore. He offers the etymology and definition of Nazareth. This book is hard to find, so I’ve included his whole article at the end of this chapter.

Also, we find an interesting dialogue between two rabbis that apply “Nazareth” to Jesus. This was not lost on the Jewish Rabbis at the time. In their Talmud we have a narration that gives us some insight. It seems that Rabbi Eliezer was arrested because he was under suspicion of having converted to Christianity. It was at a time in the year 109 AD when Trajan was emperor, and another Rabbi named Eliezer ben Hyrcanus had also been arrested under suspicion of becoming a follower of Yeshua. When he appeared before the tribunal, the judge said to him, “How can a wise man like you occupy himself with those meaningless tales?’ He replied, ‘I acknowledge the Judge as right.’ The governor thought that he referred to him — though he really referred to his Father in Heaven — and said, ‘Because you have acknowledged that I am right, I pardon you; you are acquitted.’ When he came home, his disciples visited him to console him, but he would accept no consolation.”¹³ His disciples believed this was due to the fact that he was grieved over being suspected of apostasy. Then one Rabbi said to him, “Master, will you permit me to say one thing of what you have taught me?” He replied, “Say it.” “Master,” said he, “perhaps some of the teaching of this deceiver that has been transmitted to you and you approved of it and because of that you were arrested?” He exclaimed: “You have reminded me.” I was once walking in the upper-market of Sepphoris when I came across one of the disciples of Yeshua the Nazarene, his name was Jacob of Kefar-Sekanaiah [Scholars believe this was James the son of Alphaeus,¹⁴ or James the Little,¹⁵ who said to me: It is written in your Torah, You will not hire and bring a harlot . . . into the house of the Lord your God.¹⁶ Can such money be applied to building a place of rest for the High Priest? [Who spent the whole night preceding the Day of Atonement in the precincts of the Temple, where due provision had to provide for all his conveniences]. To which I made no reply. Said he to me: That is what I was taught by Yeshua the Nazarene. For of the hire of a harlot she has gathered them and to the hire of a harlot they will return. They came from a place of filth, let them go to a place of filth. Those words pleased me very much, and that is why I was arrested for apostasy; in so doing I transgressed the scripture that says: Distance yourself far from her – which refers to the deceiver – and do not come near to the door of her house, – which refers to the ruling power.”¹⁷

Whether or not this quote is actually from Jesus, or it is a paraphrase of what this disciple heard, it does provide evidence that the Rabbis in Galilee knew of Him and His followers. Also, the key to understanding this saying is in the last line, where it mentions that the term “harlot” is a metaphor for the Jewish Sanhedrin and leading priests and Rabbis. Also, often when Jewish Rabbis wrote their opinions that were then included in the Talmuds, they often used code words so that only those with inside information could understand who they were referring to. In the Talmud we read this paragraph: “There is no separating: that means, may our group not be like that of David from which resulted in the rise of Ahithophel. And no separation: that means, may our group not be like that of Saul from which Doeg the Edomite rose to prominence. And no outcry: may our group not be like that of Elisha, from which Gehazi disconnected. Where our membership is the highest: may we produce no son or pupil who disgraces himself in public.”¹⁸ Here is the key to understanding this. Ahithophel became a byword for someone who causes a division among the supporters of the King. And when someone was referred to as a Doeg, it meant they were up to no good. Of course Gehazi became an outcast as a leper and was supposed to cry “unclean, unclean” to anyone who approached him. Likewise, the son or pupil who disgraces himself was a metaphor for someone who accepted heretical teachings, and should identify themselves as such. And finally, “in public” meant such a person should not be recognized as a valid member belonging to the Rabbi or priestly class, making a public spectacle of themselves. We are told that in the Munich Codex of one Talmud it reads: “like the Nazarene.” This of course could only mean Yeshua of Nazareth.

Also, a well-known traveler during the Middle Ages made this note about a visit to Rome: “Rome is about twenty-four miles in circumference. In the middle there are eighty palaces belonging to eighty kings who lived there, each called Emperor, commencing with King Tarquinius down to Nero and Tiberius, who lived at the time of Yeshua the Nazarene, ending with Pepin, who freed the people of Sepharad¹⁹ from Islam, and was the father of Charlemagne.”²⁰ For all the parsing of words and twisting of meanings done by the Jews to discredit Jesus of Nazareth as the Messiah, a Dutch Christian scholar of Hebrew, stated that these Jewish scholars used their own fill-in-the-blanks, when they assert that the words of Moses, and the prophets, should not be taken verbatim, but by what they meant to say. Unfortunately, we find some Christian scholars are doing the same thing today with the words of Christ.²¹ Here is the article on Nazareth I mentioned earlier:

NAZARETH, a town of Galilee, about an hour’s walk to the southeast from Sepphoris, chiefly celebrated as the residence of our Lord’s parents, and the home of his youth.²² It is a singular fact that the first mention of this town is in connection with the advent of the Messiah. The name occurs nowhere in the O.T., nor in documents before the birth of Christ, nor is it found used by any classic author. The name Nazareth demands the attention of the Biblical scholar on account of the statement of the evangelist Matthew, ‘And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth; that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene.’²³ This passage is confessedly difficult, and has formed the basis of determined attacks upon the inspiration of Scripture from the earliest ages. Various interpretations have been given. The words here cited are not found in any part of the sacred Scriptures. Some say that by the ‘prophets’ are meant, not the authors of the O.T., but a lower grade of prophetic interpreters, who deduced this meaning from their words. Others affirm that Matthew refers to some traditional saying, and not to any written text. Others, again, state that some portions of the canonical Scriptures have perished, and this passage among them. These explanations will not satisfy the critical scholar. The phrase used here and else where in the gospels, as a proper name, to denote one of the three great sections into which the Jews divided the O.T.;²⁴ but the very generality of the reference is enough to show that this is no citation from any one of the sacred writers, but a summary of the symbolic or spiritual meaning of several. It ought to be remembered that the allusions to the Messiah in the O.T. are of three kinds, directly prophetical, typical, and symbolical. We are justified, therefore, as Bishop Ellicott says, in assigning to the word Messiah all the meanings legitimately belonging to it, by derivation or otherwise, which are concurrent with the declarations of the prophets in reference to our Lord. We may therefore trace this prophetic declaration, (a) principally and primarily, in all the passages which refer to the Messiah under the title of the Branch (Netser), of the root of Jesse;²⁵ (b) in the references to the circumstances of lowliness and obscurity under which that growth was to take place;²⁶ and perhaps further (c) in the prophetic notices of a contempt and rejection such as seems to have been the common and, as it would seem in many respects, deserved portion of the inhabitant of rude and ill-reputed Nazareth. The whole history of Nazareth clusters round one event, known throughout the Christian world as the “Annunciation.” Before that event its name was unknown ; but since, it has become a household word throughout Christendom, linked in holy alliance with Bethlehem and Jerusalem. From this event comes all its traditional glory. Splendid structures have been built to commemorate it. Thousands of pilgrimages have been made in honor of it. But to the thoughtful Christian, Nazareth – the home of Christ’s boyhood, the scene of his domestic relations, his private life, his mental development, his prayers and communion with the Father, his early labors – possesses a far greater charm, a far more intense interest, than the miraculous event of the Annunciation could ever of itself have conferred. Yet there is little said about Nazareth in the gospels ; and the references to its site and features are only incidental. They are worthy of note, however. ‘The angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth, to a virgin . . . and the virgin’s name was Mary.’²⁷ From Galilee, out of Nazareth,’ Joseph and Mary went to Bethlehem to be taxed.²⁸ After the return of the holy family from Egypt, they returned into Galilee, to their own city²⁹ Nazareth.’ After the visit to the temple at the age of twelve, Jesus went down with his parents to Nazareth, and was subject unto them.’³⁰ When entering on his public life, Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee, and was baptized of John in Jordan.’³¹ Nazareth was now no longer his home. Yet he returned to it. He came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up.’³² The reception he encountered, clearly shows the general character of the Nazarenes, and that there was some foundation for Nathanael’s question, Can any good thing come out of Nazareth?’ His fellow-townsmen not only rejected him, they sought to murder him; then he left Nazareth, and took up his residence in Capernaum, which was henceforth called his own city.’³³ Again he visited his native town, and taught in the synagogue with such clearness and power that all were astonished. Still they said in derision, Is not this the carpenter’s son? . . . how then, can this man be all these things? And they were offended by him.’³⁴ We hear no more of Nazareth in sacred history, and its traditional history is not worth recording. It attracted no notice till the establishment of Christianity in the time of Constantine; nor does it seem to have been visited by a single pilgrim till about the 6th century. In the 7th century it contained two churches—one built over the fountain; the other over the house of Mary, now occupied by the Latin convent. During the Crusades, its great church was rebuilt and richly endowed, and the town was made the seat of a bishop.³⁵

As far as the text of Matthew’s Gospel is concerned, Jesus and His parents are now in the village where He will grow up as He prepares Himself for the ministry to come. Some have often wondered why the Gospel writers did not spend more time sharing His childhood with us. Perhaps we are curious as to what Jesus was like as a boy. Did Joseph teach him the skills of a carpenter? Did our Lord play with the other children, and what was His behavior. Some have tried like the Russian doctor Nicolas Notovitch, a Crimean Jewish adventurer and journalist, who in 1894 claiming that during the years of Jesus between 12 and 30, our Lord went to India and studied with Buddhists and Hindus before returning to Judea to start his ministry..³⁶

This reminds me of a story told about Aeneas Sylvius, afterwards Pope Pius the Second (1458-64), when on a visit to England, was anxious to see with his own eyes something called “barnacle geese” that were reported to grow on trees, and, since they were thought to be vegetable rather than animal, were allowed to be eaten during Lent. He traveled as far as Scotland to see them, but when arrived there he was told that he must go further, to a place called the Orchades near Kirkwall, if he wished to see these miraculous geese. He seemed rather upset by this, and, complaining that miracles always seem to lie beyond reach, he gave up chasing the barnacle geese. This is where we get our famous line, “a wild goose chase.” Such has been the effort to recover the lost years of Jesus.

We must understand that those who wrote about the life of Jesus were not writing a novel, nor were they keeping a diary. They were sharing the story of the Messiah and focused on what He came to do in order to fulfill the prophecies made about Him. Furthermore, since most of their writings came 30 to 40 years after our Lord ascended, the Holy Spirit inspired them to remember only the critical parts of the story in order to establish a firm foundation for the Gospel that was to be preached into all the world.

NEW TESTAMENT CRITICAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWO

Part V

Verses 17-18: “This helped people better understand what God was saying through the prophet Jeremiah: ‘A sound was heard in Ramah—bitter crying and great sadness. Rachel cries for her children, and she cannot be comforted, because her children are gone.’”

Here Matthew picks up on Jeremiah’s words: “This is what the Lord says: ‘A sound is heard in Ramah – bitter crying and great sadness. Rachel cries for her children, and she refuses to be comforted, because her children are gone.’”¹ Matthew does not say that this was written about these innocent boys being murdered as a result of King Herod’s rage. Jeremiah was speaking about so many Israelites being lost to foreign armies. However, Rachel’s mourning over them could not have been any worse than the wailing now heard over all these murdered boys. As believers, we can also see some similarities in the life of Jesus. His first coming fulfilled prophecy and brought joy and singing; His departure brought the fulfillment of prophecy but weeping and wailing was heard. His second coming to resurrect those who died in the faith and transform those who are living will be a repeat of the sounds of joy, while His immediate departure with the saints will bring on wailing and sadness. Dr. Lightfoot feels strongly that clarification is needed here to clear up some misunderstanding of the location of Ramah. This we find in early church father writings: “Therefore, on account of the voice which would be heard from Rama, i.e., from Arabia (for there is in Arabia at this very time a place called Ramah), wailing would come from the place where Rachel the wife of Jacob called Israel, the holy patriarch, has been buried, i.e., near Bethlehem; while the women weep for their own slaughtered children, and have no consolation by reason of what has happened to them.”² Dr. Lightfoot’s clarification on “Ramah” and how it applies to what happened to the innocents in Bethlehem:

“In Ramah was there a voice heard, lamentation and weeping, and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children, and would not be comforted, because they are no more. The prophecy referred to is in Jeremiah,³ which, upon examination, will appear to be a literal prophecy relating to this fact, and this only; for it cannot be understood about the Babylonian captivity, and of the mourning of the Jewish women upon that account, is evident, if these be considered: 1) That in such a general calamity the mourning is general, as undoubtedly that was, and not confined to mothers only, as this is. 2) That there is no reason to believe that the mourning for the captivity was confined to a particular place, much less that Ramah should be that place, since there is no manner of evidence that the captives were gathered together there, and deplored their miserable condition. Besides, 3) The cause of this mourning is not captivity,but death; Rachel is introduced weeping for her children, not because they were carried captive, but because they are no more; which is a phrase by which death is frequently expressed,⁴ but everything well agrees with the slaughter of the infants at Bethlehem,and there are several things in the context, as well as in the text, which serve to confirm this sense. First: The preceding verses manifestly speak of the blessings of the Messiah’s kingdom, and of the joy and comfort which his people should partake of; but lest any should imagine that that dispensation should be entirely free from the usual sorrows, distresses, and afflictions of life, it is declared, that the people of God would at some times, not only be met with distress in their own consciences for sin, and the chastisements of God upon them for the same reason, as in verses 18, 19, but also with bitter persecutions from the world, and that, even almost as soon as the Messiah was born, Satan would begin to exert his rage, and the most tragic and barbarous action be committed, that ever was heard of, which is expressed in the prophecy under consideration. Secondly: The tender and sorrowful mothers mourning over their slaughtered infants, in and about Bethlehem, may very well be represented by Rachel; not only because Bethlehem was the place of her sepulcher,⁵ but because of her eager desire and overmuch fondness of having children,⁶ and therefore a very fit person to represent tender and affectionate mothers bewailing the death of their children; and though Bethlehem was in the tribe of Judah, where Leah’s, and not Rachel’s children lived, yet Ramah was in the tribe of Benjamin, who was Rachel’s child; which two tribes of Judah and Benjamin, bordering on each other, the prophecy well agrees with the evangelist’s account of this matter; for though Bethlehem of Judah was the principal seat of this tragic action, yet it was not confined there, but was extended to all the coasts thereof; so that the voice of lamentation was heard in Ramah of Benjamin: Thus the objection of the Jews against the citation of this prophecy in Matthew, and its application to Jesus, is made void.”⁷

In Matthew’s mind, what Jeremiah’s reference to God’s children having been scattered and lost among the nations was a time for grief among the Jews. And that those who passed by Rachel’s grave might hear her crying for them much like she cried for her own. But they were to be comforted because He would bring them back. This weeping and grieving over those who were lost, Matthew likened to the weeping and grieving taking place in Bethlehem after the merciless murder of these sons who would never come back.

Verses 19-20: “While Joseph was in Egypt, Herod died. An angel from the Lord came to Joseph in a dream and said, ‘Get up! Take the child with his mother and go to Israel. Those who were trying to kill the child are now dead.’”

Here Matthew picks up the story of Joseph and Mary in Egypt. By now, Joseph must have been use to an angel giving him advice and direction. So there would be little hesitation for him to obey. It must be noted, that the angel did not tell Joseph to go back to Bethlehem, or even Judea. Rather, he was to return to Israel. This was the northern part of the country where the city of Nazareth was located. We have no record that Jesus ever visited Bethlehem again. For the rest of His life He would be tied to Nazareth, even while living in Capernaum. Jewish historian Josephus reminds us again that king Herod died while visiting Jericho. After his mass infanticide following the magi’s departure, there is no reason to have pity for him. Josephus says, “But now Herod’s distemper greatly increased upon him after a severe manner, and this by God’s judgment upon him for his sins; for a fire glowed in him slowly, which did not so much appear to the touch outwardly, as it augmented his pains inwardly; for it brought upon him a vehement appetite to eating, which he could not avoid to supply with one sort of food or other. His entrails were also ex-ulcerated, and the chief violence of his pain lay on his colon; an aqueous and transparent liquor also had settled itself about his feet, and a like matter afflicted him at the bottom of his belly”.⁸ According to historical records, Archelaus succeeded his father Herod the Great in 4 BC, and reigned until 6 AD according to the Christian calendar. These dates have given some Bible historians the notion that when the current calendar was formulated, the original date tied to Jesus’ birth was off as many as 4 to 6 years. In any case, when we look at the Jewish Scroll of Fasts, which was composed very early in the first century AD, we find a list of memorable days in Jewish history, which were kept as special days in the calendar, when fasting was not permitted. Most of the entries refer to events which happened between the second century BC and the first century AD. They are arranged in twelve sections, according to the Jewish month in which they occurred. The list was written in Aramaic, and it was later greatly amplified by a Hebrew commentary written in about the 7th century AD. On the 7^th day of the ninth month, Kislev, (our November) there is a holiday. According to the Jewish Teachers, this day commemorates the death of Herod the Great in 4 BC. This has led some Christian scholars to adjust the Christian calendar to recognize that Jesus was born anywhere from 6 to 4 BC. We do not know how long, but sometime after Herod’s horrible yet deserving death, an angel appeared to Joseph down in Egypt in a dream. Some scholars believe it was the same angel who told Joseph to go down into Egypt in the first place. This means that Joseph was not be afraid of this angel and be willing to accept his message. We do not know how long Joseph waited after Herod died to return to Nazareth. But one thing for sure, it was not without concern because he may not have known who took over from Herod as king. As it would turn out, King Herod Agrippa would take the throne, and Jesus would meet him later toward the end of His life.

NEW TESTAMENT CRITICAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWO

Part IV (con’t) 09/23/15

In the mean time, we find Joseph, Mary and Jesus in Egypt. According to Dr. John Lightfoot: “…provision was made for the poverty of Joseph and Mary, while they sojourned in Egypt (at Alexandria, probably), partly by selling the presents of the wise men for food and provision by the way; and partly by a supply of victuals from their country-folks in Egypt when they had need.”¹ Dr. Lightfoot also suggests that Jesus and His parents were in Egypt no more than three to four months. This was to fulfill what is said in Hosea: “The Lord said, ‘I loved Israel when he was a child, and I called my Son out of Egypt.”² To this Dr. Lightfoot adds the following commentary:

“Now though it may be granted, that Israel was a type of the Messiah, and is therefore one of the names by which he is called in the Old Testament, particularly in, Isaiah,³ and that there is a very great resemblance between Israel’s going down into, and coming out of Egypt, and that of Christ’s, as also, that the deliverance of the people of Israel out of Egypt might he used proverbially to express any remarkable deliverance from imminent danger, yet I apprehend that the words are to be understood of the Messiah in their first, literal, proper, and obvious sense, and of him only; and so the evangelist Matthew must be supposed to understand them, whose manifest design is to produce direct proofs of Jesus’ Messiahship, out of the Old Testament, which mere allusions, types, allegories, and accommodations of phrases cannot be allowed to be. Now, in order to fix the literal sense of these words, as applicable to the Messiah, let it be observed, that the scope and design of the preceding chapters is to set before the people of Israel their many provoking sins and transgressions, in order to bring them to an acknowledgment of, and repentance for them; and to declare, that upon their non-repentance, divine judgments would be executed upon them, to the utter ruin of their kingdom and nation, which account is continued to the end of the tenth chapter: but God being rich in mercy, in wrath remembers mercy, and for the sake of his own people, which were among them, mitigates this sentence, and in the eleventh chapter declares the yearnings of his heart towards them, and his very great affection for them, not withstanding all their ingratitude to him; the true causes of which kindness of his, are laid together in this first verse, which may stand connected with the latter part of the last verse of the preceding chapter; in a morning shall the king of Israel be utterly cut off,the true reason of which is because Israel is a child, that is, a rebellious and disobedient one, therefore he shall be many days without a king and without a prince; nevertheless I love him; and have therefore determined to call my son out of Egypt, who will be obliged to retire there for some time, and will set him upon the throne of his father David, who shall reign and prosper and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth or else the words may he considered, as giving the reason of God’s merciful dealing with the people of Israel, notwithstanding all their rebellions against him, and the many provocations he had received from them, because Israel is a child,that is, weak, helpless, and cannot govern himself; foolish, ignorant, imprudent, and needs instruction; and I love him, therefore I have determined to call, or I will call, the past tense for the future, which is common in the Hebrew language, especially in the prophetic writings, my son out of Egypt, who, through Herod’s rage and malice, will be obliged to abide there for a while, yet I will bring him from thence into the land of .Judea,where he shall be brought up, and shall help my child, Israel, shall instruct him in the precepts of the law, and in the doctrines of the gospel, and at last, by suffering death, shall procure the pardon of all his transgressions; for notwithstanding all his ingratitude towards me, of which a particular account is given in verses 2-7, yet I cannot but have a regard for him, and show compassion to him, and therefore he says in verse 8, How shall I give thee up, Ephraim? how shall I deliver thee, Israel? how shall I make thee as Admah? how shall I set thee as Zeboim? mine heart is turned within me, my repentings are kindled together. Now this appears to be the natural and unconstrained sense of these words, which sufficiently justifies the evangelist Matthew in his citation of them, on the occasion of Jesus’ going into Egypt and his return from thence; they being a literal prophecy of the Messiah, which had its exact fulfillment in Jesus.”⁴

In my commentary under verses 18-22 below, I share the various methods that Jewish scholars used to interpret scripture. One of them is Remez, which means: “a hint” — wherein a word, phrase or other element in the text hints at a truth not conveyed by the literal sense of the text. The implied presupposition is that God can hint at things of which the Bible writers themselves were unaware. I agree with those who believe that Matthew was using this method of interpretation of what the prophet Hosea actually said without being aware of it.⁵ That’s why its important that we notice how Matthew put it, “This is what the Lord meant when He spoke through the prophet.”

Verse 16: “Herod saw that the Magi had fooled him, and he was very angry. So he gave an order to kill all the baby boys in Bethlehem and the whole area around Bethlehem. Herod had learned from the Magi the time the baby was born. It was now two years from that time. So he said to kill all the boys who were two years old and younger.”

Herod’s arithmetic gives us a solid clue as to the length of the Magi’s journey and the age of Jesus. We see that Matthew failed to mention the purification of Mary, which takes 40 days,⁶ nor did he include Jesus’ dedication which is supposed to follow immediately after eight days. Luke does, but only after the ceremony and then skips their flight into Egypt and has them returning to Nazareth not Bethlehem where the Magi found Jesus. The shepherds found Him in a manager; the Magi found Him in a house. Some have mistakenly calculated that the Magi found Jesus sometime between birth and dedication, which was approximately forty days. However, this seems most unlikely. We see that between the dedication and return to Nazareth recorded by Luke, there is a break allowing for the Magi’s visit and then their return flight home. As we have seen, Magi also means “astrologer” and there were many such living in Persia. The distance is approximately 900 to 1,000 miles from Jerusalem. A seasoned traveler can trek this distance easily in six months, even though they traveled by night in order to follow the star. Therefore Jesus, had to be at least between eighteen months to 24 months of age at the time of their visit.

But the big story was how the Magi fooled Herod. This set him off on a vicious campaign to somehow by the luck of the draw be able to catch his so-called new King of the Jews and get rid of him without delay. Dr. John Lightfoot points out that the reason of the tarrying of Joseph and Mary in Bethlehem was this: “…that they believed that the Messiah, who, according to the prophet was born there, should have been brought up nowhere but there also; nor dared they to carry him elsewhere, before they had leave to do so by an angel from heaven.”⁷ This would certainly account for why they had not returned to Nazareth, but stayed with Joseph’s family in Bethlehem. We have already documented what a troubled and immoral man Herod was, even at the beginning of his reign. Some doubting scholars indicate that this slaying of the innocent males was a myth because there is no record of it in Josephus or any other writings of that era. Matthew is quite clear, that the killings took place “only in Bethlehem.” Therefore, we do not know the population of Bethlehem at that time nor how many 2 year old boys were there. But in order for it to become part of secular history, it would have to either be a massacre large enough to get their attention, or in the journal of someone who lived there. Rabbi David Solomon Gans, the Jewish chronicler in his edition on Jewish History, calls Herod: “a bloody and deceitful man” who was capable of such a heinous act. Although most scholars, secular and religious, do not see any hint in Jewish historian Josephus’ writings concerning the killing of these infants, we do see a tendency and trend on Herod’s part that may clearly have involved such action.

Josephus writes about the Pharisees and their opposition to Herod: “They foretold how God decreed that Herod’s government come to an end, and none of his sons would ever sit on the throne…These predictions were not concealed from Salome, but were told to the king; as also how they had perverted some persons about the palace itself; so the king slew such of the Pharisees as were principally accused, and Bagoas the eunuch, and one Carus, who exceeded all men of that time in comeliness, and one that was his catamite.⁸ He slew also all those of his own family who had consented to what the Pharisees foretold; and for Bagoas, he had been puffed up by them, as though he should be named the father and the benefactor of him who, by the prediction, was foretold to be their appointed king; for that this king would have all things in his power.”⁹ But even further information can be found in the insights of a Roman grammarian and philosopher who lived in the fifth century AD. We know next to nothing about him, but his works have been incredibly influential in Western thought given that they were some of the most commonly read and cited works by medieval Christian philosophers given their clear and well-presented arguments in favor of neo-Platonism. However one of the things this philosopher is well-known for is being the original source for a particularly cruel anti-Jewish joke that was attributed by him to the Emperor Augustus, which goes as follows: “When Augustus heard that among the boys under two years old in Syria whom Herod the King of the Jews had ordered to be killed, his own son had also been slain, he said, ‘It is better to be Herod’s pig than his son‘.”¹⁰ This suggests that Augustus was appalled at what Herod had done and in order to express his distaste he points out; via implication in the humor, that Herod is a vicious and immoral Jewish tyrant willing to murder even his own son in order to maintain his power. But even more, it shows that the story of the murder of the innocents in Bethlehem was not a well-kept secret, and was known even among Gentile authors. With so much evidence from both sacred and secular resources, it is almost an act of pure denial for anyone to dismiss this part of the story of Jesus as mere myth or made up anecdotes by His followers.

Early Church Father Eusebius, also chronicles what happened later on to Herod and gives additional details in this account:

“The disease then seized his whole body and he was overcome by various torments. For he had a low fever, and the itching of the skin over his whole body was unstoppable. He suffered also from continuous pains in his colon, and there were swellings in his feet like those of a person suffering from dropsy, while his abdomen was inflamed and his privy member so putrefied as to produce worms. Besides this he could only breathe by sitting in an upright position, and then with difficulty, and he had involuntary shaking of all his limbs, so that the astrologers said that his diseases were a punishment. But he, although wrestling with such sufferings, nevertheless clung to life and hoped for recovery, and devised methods of cure. For instance, crossing over the Jordan River he used the warm baths at Callirhoe, which flow into Lake Asphaltites, but are themselves safe enough to drink. His physicians here thought that they could warm his whole body again by means of heated oil. But when they let him down into a tub filled with oil, his eyes became weak and turned up like the eyes of a dead person. But when his attendants raised an outcry, he recovered at the noise, but finally, despairing of a cure, he commanded about 50 drachmas to be distributed among the soldiers, and great sums to be given to his generals and friends. Then he returned to Jericho, where, being seized with grief, he planned to commit an godless deed, as if challenging death itself. After collecting from every town the most talented men of all Judea, he commanded that they be shut up in the so-called hippodrome. And having summoned Salome, his sister and her husband, Alexander, he said: ‘I know that the Jews will rejoice at my death. However, others may have pity on me and give me a splendid funeral if you are willing to perform my commands. As soon as I expire, surround these men who are now under guard, as quickly as possible with soldiers, and kill them, in order that all Judea and every house may weep over me even against their will.’ And again he was so tortured by want of food and by a convulsive cough that, overcome by his pains, he planned to decide his fate. Taking an apple he asked also for a knife, for he was accustomed to cutting apples and eating them. Then looking around to see that there was no one to hinder, he raised his right hand as if to stab himself. In addition to these things, he murdered another of is own sons before his death, the third one killed by his command, and that shortly thereafter he breathed his last, but not without excessive pain.¹¹

What a horrible end to a miserable life and wretched man. But the greatest loss was the grace of God to which he had access to but did not reach for. Now, after studying ancient accounts of Herod’s death, Dr. Jan Hirschmann, a physician at the University of Washington School of Medicine in Seattle, thinks the king probably died of chronic kidney disease, complicated by a particularly nasty case of gangrene. Other physicians also believe he may have been suffering from a case of tertiary syphilis.

NEW TESTAMENT CRITICAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWO

Part IV

Verses 12-14: “But God warned the Magi in a dream not to go back to King Herod. So they went back to their own country by a different route. After the Magi left, an angel from the Lord came to Joseph in a dream. The angel said, ‘Get up! Take the child with His mother and escape to Egypt. Herod wants to kill the child and will soon start looking for Him. Stay in Egypt until I tell you to come back.’ So Joseph got ready and left for Egypt with the child and the mother. They left during the night.” While it may be thought that the Magi set out on their journey inspired by their love for astrology and star gazing, there is much to be said as to their purpose. They were looking for a new born king. They were led to Jerusalem. Then they were led to the house where Joseph, Mary and Jesus were staying. Was all of this sheer luck or good astronomy? If God now warned them in a dream to leave and not tell Herod anything about where they found the boy, could it not be that God in His own infinite way sparked their interest in learning what this new star in the sky really meant? Furthermore, here we see God’s omniscience with regards to Herod’s ensuing action of murdering the infant boys. How true that God knows men’s thoughts before they are expressed. There is something very interesting here in the way that the angel in verses 13 & 20 specifies directions so clearly. The writer is explicit in his narration when he reiterates that Joseph took “the child and His mother.” Even though they were ceremonially man and wife, the scripture clearly indicates that this product of Mary’s womb was not the result of the usual intimate relationship between his mother and her husband. Joseph is referred to here in a way that shows a “parental relationship,” not a “biological relationship,” and therefore was merely an accomplice to the greatest story ever told. It also signifies that God did not motivate Joseph to ask Mary to wed him simply out of love or because he wanted a wife to bear him children, but God was choosing a good caretaker of this remarkable girl and her supernatural son. For some reason we are not told into what part of Egypt Joseph took Mary and Jesus. This was a traditional place of refuge, as we can see in various Scriptures.¹ Some say they went to Alexandria because there was a large Jewish community there at the time. In one Jewish document the Rabbis were discussing about when a writ of divorce is made out, how in some cases an inscription is made on leather in the form of writing, and how if it is done on the Sabbath the writ is then void. In an unusual remark, one Rabbi stated: “Now did not Ben Stada – [Jesus] learn and bring magic to make marks on leather in the form of writing in the same way?”² Two hundred years later Jewish writers make this same point, only they say, “It was taught: ‘But did not Ben Stada [Jesus] bring forth witchcraft from Egypt by means of scratches in the form of charms on His flesh? He was a fool, answered they, and proof cannot be adduced from fools.”³ Although it is unclear as to just what types of marks or scratches on Jesus’ skin they were referring to, there is always the possibility that this was their way of trying to debunk the testimony of the disciples, who said that they saw the risen Christ and knew it was Him because of the nail prints in His hands and the scar in His side. But it does verify that the Jews were aware of the time Jesus spent in Egypt as a child, which fits Matthew’s account. In light of this, there is an interesting story in Jewish tradition about Gehazi, Elisha’s servant who was stricken with leprosy because of his disobedience by accepting gifts from the Syrian General Naaman after he was healed in the Jordan River. After hearing this story, someone in the group asked: “What happened to Rabbi Joshua ben Perahjah?” They were told: “When King Jannai slew our Rabbis, Rabbi Joshua ben Perahjah (and Jesus) fled to Alexandria, Egypt . . . And a great teacher has said, ‘Jesus the Nazarene practiced magic and let Israel astray’.”⁴ The problem with this story is that it makes Jesus a contemporary with King Jannai (104-78 BC). Very few scholars have accepted this as having any credibility, therefore that is why it was scrubbed from later copies of the Talmud. Nevertheless, it does show us that Jesus being down in Egypt was a subject in Jewish discussions. Then in a polemic document the writer gives his opinion on Jesus being taken down into Egypt: “What was the reason for this? If he were God, why should he have been afraid of the king? Why, we see that God’s angels and servants were not afraid of flesh and blood; they carried out their divine mission openly, and no man had the power to touch them or harm them at all.”⁵ What this anonymous writer of the polemic did not take into account was that Jesus was here to fulfill all scriptures written about the Messiah so that His claim to be the Messiah would be clearly authenticated. Joseph and Mary were not so much afraid of Herod as they were respectful of the angel’s message from God. But a Christian apologists had an answer for such speculation:

“My opponent will perhaps meet me with many other slanderous and childish charges which are being spread everywhere. That Jesus was a Magician; he effected all these things by secret arts. From the shrines of the Egyptians he stole the names of angels of might, and the religious system of a remote country. Why, O you of little wisdom, do you speak of things which you have not examined, and which are unknown to you, running your mouth with the babble of a rash tongue ? Were, then, those things which were done, the freaks of demons, and the tricks of magical arts? Can you specify and point out to me any one of all those magicians who have ever existed in the past ages, that did anything similar, in the thousandth degree, to Christ? Who has done this without any power of incantations, without the juice of herbs and of grasses, without any anxious watching of sacrifices, of libations, or of seasons? And yet we all agree that Christ performed all those miracles which He wrought without any aid from external things, without the observance of any ceremonial, without any specific procedure, but solely by the inherent might of His authority; and as was the proper duty of a true God, as was consistent with His nature, as was worthy of Him, in the generosity of his bounteous power he bestowed nothing hurtful or injurious, but only that which is helpful, beneficial, and full of blessings good for mankind.”⁶

I’m sure to all of what our brother said here we can shout a loud “Amen!” We may not be as loquacious or witty as this writer, but the point is the same. Why do we cringe when we are confronted and challenged by those who do not believe in God, the Bible, Creation, Miracles, the Resurrection, etc? Remember, as this writer said, it is incumbent upon them to prove they are right just as much as they ask us to prove we are right.

Verse 15: “Joseph stayed in Egypt until Herod died. This helped people to better understand what the Lord meant when He said through the prophet: ‘I called my son to come out of Egypt.’” Jesus could have been as old as 18 to 24 months when the Magi came, and Joseph and Mary stayed in Egypt several years, by the time they got to Nazareth, Jesus may have been as old as 5 years of age. The prophet mentioned here by Matthew was Hosea, who said: “The Lord said, ‘I loved Israel when he was a child, and I called my son out of Egypt.‘”⁷ Another Rabbi sees this verse differently, and renders it: “When Israel was a child in Egypt, then in My love for him, I used to cry out whenever I saw him, O My son.”⁸ A more recent Jewish translation puts it this way: “When Isra’el was a child, I loved him; and out of Egypt I called my son.”⁹ This conforms very much to the Aramaic text of this verse. There is no reason not to believe that Matthew was convinced that this statement involved Jacob going down into Egypt during the famine and stayed there with Joseph until he died. Then the children of Israel remained in Egypt some 450 years before God called out Jacob’s children, out of the love he had for him since he was a child. But Matthew saw that this word from God about Israel, in fact contained a subliminal message about His Son the Messiah. Regardless of what happened to Joseph, Mary and Jesus in Egypt, Herod paid for his treachery and attempt to end the Savior’s life before His ministry could be realized. Luke is the first one to tell us the following story: “Later, Herod moved from Judea. He went to the city of Caesarea and stayed there a while. Herod was very angry with the people from the cities of Tyre and Sidon. But these cities needed food from his country, so a group of them came to ask him for peace. They were able to get Blastus, the king’s personal servant, on their side. Herod decided on a day to meet with them. On that day he was wearing a beautiful royal robe. He sat on his throne and made a speech to the people. The people shouted, ‘This is the voice of a god, not a man!’ Herod did not give the glory to God. So an angel of the Lord caused him to get sick. He was eaten by worms inside him, and he died.”¹⁰ A venerable Jewish historian gives us an even more detailed story:

“Now when Agrippa had reigned three years over all Judea, he came to the city Caesarea, which was formerly called Strato’s Tower; and there he exhibited shows in honor of Caesar, upon his being informed that there was a certain festival celebrated to make vows for his safety. At which festival a great multitude was gotten together of the principal persons, and such as were of dignity through his province. On the second day of which shows he put on a garment made wholly of silver, and of a design truly wonderful, and came into the theater early in the morning; at which time the silver of his garment being illuminated by the fresh reflection of the sun’s rays upon it, shone out after a surprising manner, and was so resplendent as to spread a horror over those that looked intently upon him; and presently his flatterers cried out, one from one place, and another from another, (though not for his good,) that he was a god; and they added, ‘Be thou merciful to us; for although we have up until now only reverenced you as a man, yet we will from now on accept you as superior to mortal nature.’ Upon this the king did neither rebuke them, nor reject their impious flattery. But as he shortly thereafter looked up, he saw an owl sitting on a rope over his head, and immediately understood that this bird was the messenger of ill tidings, as it had once been the messenger of good tidings to him; and he fell into the deep depression. A severe pain began to form in his belly in a most violent manner. He therefore looked at his friends, and said, ‘I, whom you call a god, am commanded presently to depart this life; while Providence thus reproves the lying words you just now said to me; and I, who was by you called immortal, am immediately to be hurried away by death. But I am bound to accept of what Providence allots, as it pleases God; for we have by no means lived ill, but in a splendid and happy manner.’ When he said this, his pain became violent. Accordingly, he was carried into the palace, and the rumor went abroad every where, that he would certainly die in a short time. But the multitude presently sat in sackcloth, with their wives and children, according to the law of their country, and besought God for the king’s recovery. All places were also full of mourning and lamentation. Now the king rested in a high chamber, and as he saw them below lying prostrate on the ground, he could not himself keep from weeping. And when he had been quite worn out by the pain in his belly for five days, he departed this life, being in the fifty-fourth year of his age.”¹¹

While Herod certainly got what was coming to him for his murder of the innocents, we cannot help be feel a sense of sorry that he died in such a horrible manner. More than this being a curse from God, Herod brought it on himself. Such is often the case in this world with those who refuse to recognize God the Father and His Son Jesus the Savior of the world. We should never be heard saying: “Good for that sinner. I’m glad he or she died, they deserved it.” Rather, we should say in the words contributed to the British parson John Bradford (1510-1555 AD), who while watching a group of prisoners being let to their execution remarked to those standing in the crowd with him: “There but for the grace of God go I.”

NEW TESTAMENT CRITICAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWO

Part III (con’t)

Verse 11: “The magi came to the house where the young child was with his mother Mary. They bowed in reverence to Him. Then they opened the boxes of gifts they had brought for Him. The gifts they gave Him included gold, frankincense, and myrrh.” It is interesting to note that the Magi found Jesus in a “house,” not the stable, and Jesus is referred to as a young child. This indicates that their coming was quite a number of months after Jesus’ birth. The Law of Moses gave Mary and Joseph the procedure to follow after His birth.¹ From the scripture it is apparent that this had already been accomplished. Therefore, based on those requirements the arrival of the Magi was at the very earliest 40 days after Christ’s birth, but based on when they saw the star it could have taken as many as two years for them to get there.² Ironically, it is from the presentation of gifts that the theory for the number of Magi was formed. They brought many gifts, and among them the most expensive were gold, frankincense, and myrrh. This has led some to speculate that this constituted one gift per Magi. All of this is hypothesis, and should not be taken as a settled fact. As a matter of fact, in one of the oldest Hebrew versions of Matthew, this verse reads that they “opened their sacks, and brought to him gifts made of gold, frankincense and myrrh.”³ Hence, the Magi were elevated by some to the level of kings in fulfillment of prophecy.⁴ In the distinct gifts, Gold has been associated with Jesus as a sign of His being a King; Frankincense, as a symbol of His being a High Priest; and Myrrh as representative of His being a kinsman Redeemer. What the Psalmist wished for Solomon, was now being applied to One greater than Solomon, “May all the people who live in the desert bow down to him. May all his enemies bow before him with their faces in the dirt. May the kings of Tarshish and all the faraway lands by the sea bring gifts to him. May the kings of Sheba and Seba bring their tribute to him.”⁵

One thing to keep in mind is that often English words that are connotative with current definitions, may not be conveying the same message as they did in the days when the original words in Hebrew or Greek were written. One of them is the word “worship,” as used in the KJV and NIV, when it comes to paying honor and respect to persons of high rank or royalty. In fact, the Greek word proskyneō used here means: “To kiss the person’s hand as one bows in respect before them, as well as to fall on one’s knees and though the ground with the forehead as an expression of profound reverence.” If we were to keep this definition for our use of the worship today, it appears that we fall woefully short when compared to what we do in the house of God and call it worship. As a boy I learned that when it came to the Queen of England, every man who came before her was expected to kneel on one knee, or curtsy if they were a woman. When the Magi came into the presence of the young Jesus, who was about two years old at the time, since He was considered a king, they showed their custom of bowing before Him out of honor and respect. It does not mean they worshiped Him as some god or idol. In our own society it was considered a sign of respect when someone curtsied before a teacher, elder or highly respected individual. Today this custom of bowing is more pronounced in Asia than on any other continent. In this case with the Magi, their bowing was also part of the ceremony of giving gifts to royalty.

Such was the case when Jacob sent his sons into Egypt to see Pharaoh, and they ended up giving them unknowingly to their brother Joseph.⁶ We also know that when the Queen of Sheba came to see Solomon, she too brought gifts, “She traveled to Jerusalem with a very large group of servants. There were many camels carrying spices, jewels, and a lot of gold,”⁷ as did the Psalmist wish for Solomon, “May the kings of Tarshish and all the faraway lands by the sea bring gifts to him. May the kings of Sheba and Seba bring their tribute to him. May all kings bow down to our king. May all nations serve him”.⁸ This last reference has been taken also as a hidden prophecy concerning the Messiah, and together with Isaiah,⁹ we see added: “They will bring gold and frankincense.” We are told by historians that these valuable items were standard gifts to honor a king or deity in the ancient world: gold as a precious metal, frankincense as perfume or incense, and myrrh as anointing oil. In fact, these same items were apparently among the gifts, recorded in ancient inscriptions, that King Seleucus II Callinicus offered to the god Apollo at the temple in Miletus in 243 BC. Rabbi David Kimchi, even though he used the Psalms and other O.T. Scriptures against Christians who took them as references for Jesus as the Messiah, agrees that gold and frankincense would be brought privately as presents to the king Messiah.¹⁰

It is also worthwhile to note that in Isaiah’s prophecy it says: “Jerusalem, get up and shine! Your Light is coming! The Glory of the Lord will shine on you. the Lord will shine on you, and his Glory will appear over you….Then the nations will come to your light…Herds of camels from Midian and Ephah will cross your land. Long lines of camels will come from Sheba. They will bring gold and incense. People will sing praises to the Lord.”¹¹ There is the linguistic possibility brought on by translation, that Isaiah said these camels and their riders would come from the direction of Midian and Ephah, which are both in the direction of Persia. It all depends on how they were led by the star. Although the New Testament does not give us the names for these Magi, nor how many there were, and only mentions that they brought gifts containing gold, frankincense and myrrh, there has been a lot of speculation. The Encyclopedia Britannica, under Magi (biblical figures), tells us that the names given to these magi were “derive from a Greek manuscript probably composed in Alexandria, Egypt around 500 AD, and which has been translated into Latin.¹² Also, German historian Hugo Kehrer quotes from the Latin chronicle: “At that time in the reign of Augustus, on 1st January the Magi brought him gifts and worshipped him. The Latin names of the Magi were Bithisarea, Melichior and Gathaspa.” He continues to say that the first magus, named Melchior, was an old white-haired man, with a full beard and hair, the king gave gold to our Lord. The second one, named Caspar, was a beardless boy, who gave frankincense. The third one, a dark-haired man with a full beard, named Balthasar, gave myrhh. The clothes of all three were Syrian-style. Kehrer also found that in that document, Melchior was considered to be a Persian scholar. The second magi, Caspar, was thought to be an Indian scholar. The third magi, Balthasar, was identified as an Arabian scholar. It goes on to say that the name “Jasper” or “Caspar” comes from France. It originated as part of a dialect spoken in the Cologne area of Germany, which includes the other names: Melcior and Baltazar.”¹³ In a Greek document from the 8^th century, of presumed Irish origin, and translated into Latin with the title “Collection of Flowers,” the tradition of three kings and their names is continued. However, according to Hiob Ludolph, these three magi were given different names in other languages. The one who gave gold was named “Annoson;” the one that brought frankincense was “Allytar;” and the one that offered myrrh was “Kyssad.”¹⁴ Church history also tells us that Francis of Assisi is credited with creating the first nativity scene in 1223 AD. It has grown ever since to include animals and individuals who could not have possible been there to join Joseph, Mary, Jesus, the mid-wife, and the donkey, that brought them from Nazareth, in the manger. But rather than criticizing such displays, it is better to take them as composite to recognize all those who eventually showed up to honor our Lord at the time of His birth and as a young child. In like manner, when we all gather around the throne of God in heaven, to worship the Lamb who was slain, it will not consist merely of those who initially arrived, but of everyone who came to the cross for salvation, from the first to the last. This should remind us of that grand old hymn sung many years ago that says: “Though millions have come, there is still room for one, there’s room at the cross for you.”

God is motivated more to act by what He thinks of you, than by what you think of Him. But what you think of Him will help determine how far He is willing to go. – Dr. Robert R Seyda

In reading from the famous Jewish philosopher and theologian, Moses Maimonides, I came across this section in his work called: “A Guide for the Perplexed.” He begins by saying: “We might be asked, Why has God inspired a certain person and not another? why has He revealed the Law to one particular nation, and at one particular time? why has He commanded this, and forbidden that? why has He shown through a prophet certain particular miracles? what is the object of these laws? and why has He not made the commandments and the prohibitions part of our nature, if it was His object that we should live in accordance with them? We answer to all these questions: He willed it so; or, His wisdom decided so. Just as He created the world according to His will, at a certain time, in a certain form, and as we do not understand why His will or His wisdom decided upon that peculiar form, and upon that peculiar time, so we do not know why His will or wisdom determined any of the things mentioned in the preceding questions. But if we assume that the Universe has the present form as the result of fixed laws, there is occasion for the above questions; and these could only be answered in an objectionable way, implying denial and rejection of the Biblical texts, the correctness of which no intelligent person doubts.” So often I’ve often wondered, and sometimes wished, I had lived at a different time in the history of the world. What would it have been like to be there when Jesus walked the earth; when Paul was on his missionary journeys; when Martin Luther and Calvin stoked the Reformation; or when Wesley ignited the revivals that swept the world. But I do not know who I would have reacted to any of that, perhaps since I wouldn’t know then what I know now. This has led me to thank God I live in this present era; that He created me for such a time as this, to enjoy my relationship with Him during the last seven decades. So when I get to heaven, I won’t be asked, “What would you have done if you were there when Jesus entered Jerusalem with singing, dancing and rejoicing?” But I will have to give an answer for what I did for my Master while living during an age when man went from driving down two-lane highways, to landing on the moon; from flying in helium filled dirigibles, to flying in jet aircraft; from talking to each other over a wire, to speaking with each other by way of satellite. So don’t spend your time living in the past or dreaming about living in the future. This is your era, your century, your day, your hour. Live it to the fullest in honor and glory to the KING of Kings!

NEW TESTAMENT CRITICAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWO

Part III

Verses 5-6: “They answered, “In the town of Bethlehem in Judea, just as the prophet wrote: ‘Bethlehem, in the land of Judah, although you are not among the rulers of Judah, yet a ruler will come from you, and that ruler will lead Israel, my people.’” Although Matthew is paraphrasing the prophet Micah, or perhaps using an Aramaic text we no longer possess, how accurate God’s prophecy proved to be. There was also a town known as Bethlehem of Zebulun west of Nazareth, but the Scripture specifically said: “In Bethlehem of Judah,” not “Bethlehem of Galilee,” and that is how, with the cooperation of a Roman Caesar wanting a census, it happened as the scripture said it would! One of the earliest Hebrew versions of Matthew reads this way: “You Bethlehem Judah, Ephrathah, land of Judah, behold you are insignificant among the clans of Judah; from you shall come forth to me One who will be a ruler in Israel,”¹ while the Hebrew text of Micah actually reads: “But you, Beit-Lechem near Efrat, so small among the clans of Y’hudah, out of you will come forth to me the future ruler of Isra’el, whose origins are far in the past, way back in ancient times.”² Most Jewish scholars take this prophecy to clearly involve the coming Messiah. They note that the term “Bethlehem Ephrathah” is found where David answered king Saul’s question, “Who are you?” by answering: “I am the son of your servant Yishai (Jesse) the Beit-Lachmi (Bethlehemite).”³ Also in Jacob’s talk with Joseph when he told him, “…when I came from Paddan, Rachel died suddenly, as we were traveling through the land of Kena‘an (Canaan), while we were still some distance from Efrat (Ephrath); so I buried her there on the way to Efrat [also known as Beit-Lechem] (Bethlehem).”⁴ This same Rabbi also says that calling Bethlehem “the least important town in Judah,” was due to the stigma attached to Ruth the non-Jew Moabitess whom Boaz married, and who lived there. Furthermore, in a story about the ox we shared in verse 1 above, it should be noted that when an Arab was once asked where his father was from, he stated, “From the royal capital of Bethlehem in Judea.”⁵ Nothing is called a royal capital unless it is home of a monarch. So while some believe he was referring to King David, others take this as a sign of the Messiah. Furthermore, that the term “Ruler of Israel,” is definitely a reference to the Messiah, the son of David, we see that in this statement: “The stone that the builders rejected became the cornerstone,”⁶ and that his origin is from old, because the Psalmist says: “May the king be famous forever. May people remember his name as long as the sun shines. May all nations be blessed through him, and may they all bless him.”⁷ Also, the great Jewish teacher Rabbi Rashi uses the Jewish Version that reads: “May his name endure forever, his name, Yinnon,⁸ as long as the sun. May people bless themselves in him, may all nations call him happy.” Also, Rabbi David Kimchi comments on the scripture that says: “… out of you will come to me a Judge to be Ruler in Israel, and this is the King Messiah,”⁹ as being correct with that designation. There is also an interesting comment by a medieval Jewish critic on this same scripture:

Proposition – This verse has been designated by the Christians as confirming their faith; and they assert that the prophet was saying that their Messiah would be born at Bethlehem, and their declaration is impossible for Israel to expect that the Messiah will be born there, seeing that the city of Bethlehem has already been destroyed.

Refutation – For three reasons it is impossible to vindicate this prophecy in favor of Jesus, setting aside the numerous other unsubstantial arguments they allege to prove that he was the true Messiah. First,—The above scriptural passage has no special allusion to him. The birth of Jesus in Bethlehem does not entitle him to the claim of being the Messiah, for hundreds and thousands of children were born at Bethlehem, and that circumstance did not constitute them being Messiahs. Secondly,—We read there, ‘From you will come for me a ruler.’ Now, as to Jesus of Nazareth, he was by no means a ruler. On the contrary, the people ruled over him, as is evinced by the mode of his death. Thirdly,—It is not said that Bethlehem would be the birth-place of the Messiah, for we find that the prophet adds there, ‘And his going forth shall be of olden times.’ But the sense of the verse is this: Thou Bethlehem, although one of the minor localities among the cities of Judah, from thee a man shall come forth (i. e., trace his descent back to thee), who shall be a ruler in Israel, and that same man will be the King Messiah who will be a descendant of David who came from Bethlehem. See Samuel where he is called ‘The son of an Ephrathite from Bethlehem Judah.’¹⁰ The words ‘since olden times,’ relate to the great space of time elapsed between the reign of David and the coming of the Messiah. We must also call the attention of the reader to the chapter preceding and the passages following the verse we are discussing, and it will then be perceived that the whole prophecy is applied to the terrific convulsions predicted to happen at the epoch of the ‘latter days.’ In connection with this prophecy must be read the announcements of Ezekiel 38 and 39, and Zechariah 14.”¹¹

With this type of faulty mindset, it’s no wonder that so many Jewish scholars in Jesus day refused to see the truth of the written Word because they kept their heads in the sand of verbal traditions. They could not see the future because they were fixated on the past. No wonder that Jesus told Nicodemus that in order to understand what the kingdom of heaven was all about he must be born anew.

Nevertheless, on this occasion King Herod’s counselors convinced him enough with these Scriptures that this was indeed a possibility that a unknown Messiah had been born in nearby Bethlehem. That was enough for him to become anxious that his job was in jeopardy, and that he needed to do something quickly in order to prevent this from happening.

Verses 7-8: “Then Herod had a secret meeting with the magi from the east. He learned from them the exact time they first saw the star. Then he sent them on to Bethlehem. He said, ‘Go and look carefully for the child. When you find him, come tell me. Then I can go worship him too.’” Herod’s curiosity, fueled by his jealousy and pride, prompted him to gather more information on what these Magi were really up to. His interrogation as to when they saw the star, was instigated by the desire to know how long ago this birth took place so that he would know the estimated age of this so-called king. In astrological terms, the original appearance of the star was the first sign that the birth had taken place. Of course, this meeting had to be in secret, because had it been out in the open then Herod was afraid that friends or family of the parents of this child would immediately notify them so they could either hide or escape. What Herod did not know was that this couple had friends in heavenly places, and these friends were aware of what this meeting was all about. That’s why an angel would be sent to alert them, and the Magi, on what to do before any damage could be done.

Verses 9-10: “After the Magi heard the king, they left. They spotted the same star they had followed since they left their country in the east, and continued following it. The star went before them until it stopped above the place where the child was. They were very happy and excited to see that the star had stopped.” It must be duly noted, that Matthew does not say that the magi then went to Bethlehem. Rather, they continued to follow the star. And it does not indicate that the star took them to Bethlehem, only that it took them to the place where the child (not baby) was living. The miracle of the star becomes more and more fascinating. Although several astronomical and astrological explanations have been given to its identification or what caused it to appear, still very little is known of its actual formation and why it shown brightly on this night. All one has to do is look out into the star-bedecked sky at night to see the difficulty in following just one star. But for a star to shine so bright that it could be detected by the natural eye as it came to rest overlooking one small dwelling on earth, is very extraordinary. But so was Christ’s birth!

There is no evidence that the star emitted so much light that it took on the appearance of a spotlight. But it is obvious that the Magi undertook this search at night, while the star could be clearly seen. Here we see the words of the prophecy made more clearly, “Then the nations will come to your light. Kings will come to your bright sunrise.”¹² One particular Rabbi believes that this is a reference to Jerusalem, which was “…destined to become a beacon for the nations of the earth, and they will walk in its light.”¹³ What is interesting is that this Rabbi wrote this long after the Temple in Jerusalem was destroyed in 70 AD. Could it be that they saw this light as part of the Messianic age? That after His death and resurrection, Jerusalem would become the mecca for believers to come and see the empty hill where His cross stood, and the empty grave where His body laid? There has also been some debate on just how the star guided the magi. Some scholars indicate that the star moved, like a lamp in the sky, in front of the Magi and they simply followed it. However, as we know from astronomy, it is not the stars that are moving, but appear to be doing so because of the earth’s rotation. Therefore, they used this star to fix their direction, much like the mariners did on the open seas.

Once they learned during their secret meeting that the Messiah was to be born in Bethlehem, just a few miles away, there would have been no need for such a star. What Matthew seems to be saying is that when they left the palace of Herod, they saw the star was still illuminated, so they charted their course in it’s direction and the path they took led them straight to where Joseph, Mary and Jesus were living at the time. In such a case, the star must have been low on the horizon to get such a course fixture. But after the Magi arrived, and on their way back to Persia, we find no mention of this unusual star again. This was not a foreign concept to astrologers in those days. As a matter of fact, one time Roman poet Virgil followed the star Venus until he came to the field on Laurentum to engage in battle, after which it no longer appeared. And this was written some 37 years before Christ was born.¹⁴ There’s still another factor. These Magi were traveling west, therefore they had to wait for the star that rose in the east to get directly overhead before they started following it until it disappeared on the western horizon, just as dawn began to appear in the east. In any case, God was in control of the star, so we’ll leave it up to Him as to how it really happened. But for sure, there was a star, there were Magi being guided by it, and it led them to where the baby boy Jesus, the new King of the Jews, and King of all the earth was living at that time. Perhaps this was the true star of David we hear the Jews speak of. When you look at the two intertwining triangles you might be able to imagine this: First, the upward pointing triangle represents Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The downward pointing triangle symbolizes mans Body, Mind and Spirit. The upward apex of the star is pointing to God, and the downward antapex of the star is pointing to man. But most of all, it can be seen as the star of the Messiah in that it combines both God and man into one.

Amazing how many people who lived in the darkness of not knowing that much about Jesus as the true Redeemer, once they come to the light and are born anew, have similar stories to tell. They often say: “I don’t know what it was, but I just felt drawn to the truth, it was like a light and I kept walking toward it until I found Jesus and accepted Him as my Lord and Savior.”

NEW TESTAMENT CRITICAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWO

Part II (con’t)

Verse 3: “When King Herod heard about this, it upset him as well as everyone else in Jerusalem.” This is to be expected. First of all, there is no evidence that King Herod and his wife had recently had a baby born to them. Second, news of a new king in the capitol city would have been announced from the king’s palace, not by visiting magi on camels. Third, in those days the kings of Judea were appointed by Caesar in Rome. Did that mean Caesar had appointed someone to take Herod’s place without telling him about it? So there could be only one person who fit that description, the Messiah. No doubt someone in King Herod’s court were familiar with the prophecy: “The days are coming,” says Adonai when I will raise a righteous Branch for David. He will reign as king and succeed, he will do what is just and right in the land. In his days Judah will be saved, Isra’el will live in safety, and the name given to him will be Adonai Tzidkenu, which translated is “The LORD our righteousness.”¹ Another Jewish translator renders it: “…is our righteousness.”² Could it be that these astrologers were the messengers bringing the fulfillment of this prophecy? Whatever the case, some Jewish scholars believe that a king was in this prophecy.³ In fact, one of them expresses it this way: “Kings will not cease, nor rulers, from the house of Judah, nor scribes teaching the law from his offspring, until the time that the King the Messiah, shall come, the youngest of his sons; and on account of him shall the peoples flow together. How beauteous is the King, the Messiah who will arise from the house of Judah!”⁴ And that is what upset Herod, because it indicated that people would swarm in support of the Messiah, and that would put his job and position in jeopardy. Not only that, even the Jewish Kabbalists⁵ see it like this: “What was the reason for the appearance of these Messiahs? Because there was no Moses to make intercession with the divine Shekinah, and therefore it is written, ‘There was no man to plow the ground.’ This esoteric meaning and interpretation is also that of the words, ‘And the Sceptre will not depart from Judah,”⁶ referring to the Messiah son of David; while the words, ‘nor a prince of his posterity,’ denotes Messiah the son of Joseph [Jesus].”⁷ We can also see by Matthew’s wording that he had little love or respect for the denizens of Jerusalem.⁸

Verse 4: “Herod called a meeting of all the leading Jewish priests and teachers of the law. He asked them where the Messiah would be born.” This was a logical move for Herod. Not that he wanted his army to raid the village, but simply that it would give him the information he needed when planning on how to get rid of this uninvited usurper of the throne. It also may seem strange that after finding out it was Bethlehem, that the scribes, chief priests and King Herod himself did not accompany the Magi after such a controversial subject as the new king was brought up. But there were good reasons for it. The scribes and priests expected a Messiah to arrive on the scene fully grown, and ready to establish the kingdom as a prince, not as some unknown infant in a small insignificant village. So they no doubt dismissed the Magi’s information as invalid. This is evident by the Pharisees’ reply to Jesus that no one would know where the Messiah came from nor know who his father or mother would be.⁹ Furthermore, to them the astrologers were just following stars, as was their profession. Herod also knew that if he showed up looking for this baby, the people would conceal the child because they all feared Herod the maniac. He used the Magi as spies but this time it didn’t work out the way he planned it. In the Septuagint Version,¹⁰ the term for those whom Herod called together is rendered as “officers of the people and their scribes.”¹¹ We also see that Solomon referred to these people as “leaders of assemblies.”¹² These were the leaders in every city who would call the people together for the teaching of the Torah. In fact, one Jewish scholar tells us that Solomon himself was called a leader of assemblies because he was so great at teaching.¹³ In Jesus’ day, a priest was called a “cohen.” And since “im” is the plural in Hebrew, a group of priests were referred to as “cohanim.” The role of the priest was similar to that of the prophet, to serve as a spokesman and mediator between God and man. As one Jewish scholar explains: “The prophet speaks to man on behalf of God, the priest speaks to God on behalf of man.”¹⁴ While the prophets did not have a patriarchal ancestor to point to, while all priests were descendants of Aaron, the brother of Moses. After much study, Dr. John Lightfoot conjectures that even though it was reported that Herod slew all the elders of the Sanhedrin who opposed his taking of the throne, he did not kill them all. Lightfoot says, “Out of that slaughter the two sons of Betira escaped, who held the first places in the Sanhedrin after the death of Shemaiah and Abtalion. Shammai and Hillel escaped, and both were likely present; and Menahem, who certainly was there, and who afterward sat as second in charge. Baba Ben Buta escaped also, who afterward persuaded Herod that he should repair the Temple to atone for this bloody unrighteous act. And others escaped. When the Sanhedrin consisted of priests, Levites, and Israelites, the word chief priests referred to whatever members of clergy were in the Sanhedrin; and the name scribes of the people referred to all those of the Sanhedrin who were not of the clergy.”¹⁵

NOTE: TEACHERS OF THE LAW, OR SCRIBES: Body of teachers whose office was to interpret the Law for the people, and were called in Hebrew, “sofers”. Their organization began with Ezra,¹⁶ who was their chief, and terminating with Simeon the Just. Ezra is styled “a ready scribe in the law of Moses.”¹⁷ Indeed, he might be correctly so called for two reasons, inasmuch as he could write or copy the Law and at the same time was an able interpreter of it. The original meaning of the Hebrew word soferim was “people who know how to write”; and therefore the royal officials who were occupied in recording in the archives the proceedings of each day were called soferim or “scribes.”¹⁸ But as the art of writing was known only to the intelligent, the term “scribe” became synonymous with “wise man.”¹⁹ Later, in the time of Ezra, the designation was applied to the body of teachers who, as stated above, interpreted the Law for the people. The Rabbis, however, interpret the term “soferim” to mean those who count the letters of the Torah or those who classify its contents and recount the number of laws or objects belonging in each group. For example: five classes of people that are exempt from bringing a heave-offering, four chief causes of damages, thirty-nine chief works which are forbidden on the Sabbath, etc. We find this in the Aggadah, which is the nonlegal or narrative material, as parables, maxims, or anecdotes, in the Talmud and other rabbinical literature, serving either to illustrate the meaning or purpose of the law, custom, or Biblical passage being discussed or to introduce a different, unrelated topic. It is evident that these scribes were the first teachers of the Torah and the founders of verbal teachings. The Greek term used in the New Testament is grammateus, which is variously translated as “scribes,” (KJV) and “teachers of the law,” (NIV). Both Nicodemus and Gamaliel was such. Later on after the 6^th century, these scribes became better known as Rabbis.

So it is clear, even before Jesus began His ministry and His eventual confrontations with these Jewish Rabbis, scholars and teachers, there was a narrow mindset on if and when the Messiah would come, how He would be revealed, and what He would be like. So it is no wonder that when this poor prophet named Jesus of Nazareth arrived with a bunch of uneducated fishermen, He did not fit their mold and was quickly dismissed as being an impostor. Perhaps this will help us better understand why Jesus was so pleased when He found those to whom He was able to say: “Your faith has made you whole.”²⁰

NEW TESTAMENT CRITICAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWO

Part II

Verse 2: “They asked people, ‘Where is the child who has been born to be the king of the Judeans? We saw His star that announced His birth. We saw it rise in the sky in the east and have come to worship Him.’” Most Jewish historians and scholars object to use of the English phrase here: “king of the Jews” instead of the proper term: “king of the Judeans.” One Jewish scholar gives a brief but clear explanation: “On the cross on which Jesus was crucified the words ‘Jesus of Nazareth, king of the Judaeans’ were inscribed in Hebrew.” He goes on to say that the words Messiah and Christ were synonymous in their minds with ‘son of David’ and ‘king of the Judeans‘.¹

Once the wise men arrived in Jerusalem, they started asking around about Jesus. Jerusalem, after all, was the capital city of Judea. This is where a visitor most likely would go to find a new king. You also notice, they stated: “We have seen His star.” In the Greek this is a personal possessive pronoun. These religious astrologers were not only well acquainted with the galaxies, but also the many stories connected with their significance. The wording here by Matthew of the magi saying, “We saw it rise in the sky in the east,” has been the cause for some misinterpretation. Since they had to travel from east to west, that would have put the star behind them and led them in the opposite direction. A paraphrase will make it clearer: “From where we were in the east, we saw the star rise in the sky and followed it here to worship Him.” Dr. John Lightfoot, in his commentary on Matthew, gives this explanation: “We, being in the east, have seen his star: – that heavenly light.” But it also leaves open the possibility that when the star was first seen on the horizon in the east, that as the earth turned – which to them seemed to be the other way around, that the star was moving – it went toward the west, signifying that they were supposed to go that way and follow its light. This means that they could only follow it at night. It also appears that these magi may have had access to some of the Jewish Scriptures, such as the Torah, where they read: “I see him coming, but not now. I see him coming, but not soon. A star will come from the family of Jacob. A new ruler will come from the Israelites.”² Not only that, but this was said by a fellow astrologer. Even Jewish rabbis connected this to the Messiah. In a well-known Jewish Targum we read: “I shall see Him, but not now; I shall behold Him, but it is not near. When the mighty King of Jakob’s house shall reign, and the Meshiha (Aramaic for Messiah), the Power-sceptre of Israel, be anointed.”³ It is interesting that they leave out any mention of the star, no doubt because by the time this was written (circa 1550 AD) they knew that this star had become associated with the birth of Jesus of Nazareth. Also, a Portuguese Jewish statesman, philosopher, and Bible commentator was sure the Messiah had already come. In spite of opposition, this Rabbi remained constant in his efforts to “reveal the day of redemption in the ears of the sons of Judah.” He also states: “Signs of the forthcoming upheaval could be found in many places, not least of which are the stars.” This Rabbi was convinced that the Messiah had already come sometime before the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem.⁴ He was in fact right, for Jesus was born some 75 years before the Temple was destroyed. When examining the statement by Balaam we referenced before,⁵ one medieval Jewish Rabbi says that Balaam’s statement that a star will step forth from Jacob, should be taken as “an allusion to the great name that the Messiah will make for Himself on the whole globe.”⁶ So there is no question that this star was to accompany the appearance of the Messiah, but when it was applied to Jesus of Nazareth, many Jewish scholars became defensive. In fact, Aaron, the son of a medieval Jewish physician, offers the following speech as spoken by the wise men to Herod, when conversing with him about star: “A certain person, say they, of great note with us, in a book which he composed, warned us in it, mentioning these things; a child that will descend from heaven, will be born in Palestine, whom the greatest part of the world will serve, and the sign of his appearance will be this; you will see a strange star, which will direct you where he is; when you shall see this, take gold, myrrh and frankincense, and go and offer them to him, and worship him, and then return, lest a great calamity befall you. Now the star has appeared unto us, and we are come to perform what was commanded us.”⁷ This is backed up by another writer who quoted the same message.⁸ This “certain person of great note” is actually his defense of Balaam’s prophecy, He goes on to say:

“That a remarkable star should appear. This prediction was delivered by Balaam,⁹ ‘There shall come a star out of Jacob, and a sceptre shall rise out of Israel, and shall smite the corners of Moab, and destroy all the children of Sheth.’ That this is a prediction of the Messiah is acknowledged by Targums of Onkelos and Jonathan, and Aben Ezra who say that many interpret it as the Messiah. Our people still expect the appearance of a star at the coming of Messiah. Hence we read of one whose name was Bar Cochvah, i. e. the Son of a star, who claimed to be the Messiah, and had many followers; but, after his death, and not rising again from the dead, they became convinced that he had been a deceiver, and therefore called him Bar Cosivah, i. e. the son of a lie. Abulpharagius,¹⁰ an Arabic writer, tells us that Zoroastres, who lived four or five hundred years before Christ, instructed his magicians of the coming of Messiah, and that at his birth there should appear a wonderful star, which would shine by day as well as by night; and therefore left it on command with them, that when that star appeared they should follow its direction, and go to the place where he was to be born, and there offer gifts and pay their adoration’s to him. Now this Zoroaster appears to have been a Jew, both by birth and religion, and servant to one of the prophets of Israel, and well versed in the sacred writings, and therefore may well be supposed to have learned all this from the prophecy of Balaam. All this was remarkably fulfilled in Jesus Christ. At his birth an unusual star appeared, which led the magi, or wise men, from the East to Bethlehem, where they found the holy child Jesus, ‘and they fell down and worshiped him; and when they had opened their treasures, they presented unto him gifts; gold, and frankincense, and myrrh’:¹¹ and thus another Scripture was fulfilled, which saith, ‘the kings of Tarshish and of the isles shall bring presents: the kings of Sheba and Seba shall offer gifts.’¹² This leads me to notice two other circumstances, which, though perhaps not directly prophecies, yet may be said to be fulfilled in Jesus”.¹³

This mention of the gifts can also be found in Greek writings. We read: “Unto him shall priests convey and offer gold, and myrrh, and frankincense; for all these things he’ll also bring to pass.”¹⁴ In addition, a 4th-century philosopher (and possibly a Christian) states: “There is also a more venerable and sacred history, which speaks of the rising of a certain unusual star; not foretelling diseases and deaths, but the descent of a venerable God, born for the sake of human conversation, and the affairs of mortals; which star truly, when the wise men of the Chaldeans saw in their journey by night, and being very expert in the consideration of celestial things, are said to inquire after the birth of the new Deity, and having found the infant majesty, to worship him, and pay their vows worthy of such a God.”¹⁵ The end purpose for these Magi in taking such a long journey is clearly established from many sources. They were there to pay their respects to the fulfillment of a long standing prophecy. They were convinced by an extraordinary appearance of an unusual star that led them to believe that it had taken place. This was no overnight phenomenon, it was two years in the making, including their travels. How ironic that these religious astrologers from the east were more impressed with the coming of a new Judean king than were the residents of the very land in which he was born. So, there was a general expectancy of a coming world monarch. This star was the sign He had arrived. But where? With all the intricacies involved in the interpretation, the journey, the timing, the location and the circumstances, their success gives hint to the involvement of a higher power rather than the mere sagacity of these Magi. One can be assured that the Omnipotent, Omnipresent, Omniscient One was involved in their motivation to follow the star. After all, it was His Son being born a human!¹⁶ The events of this chapter have a striking similarity to the plight of Israel as a nation: Jesus unusual birth; His flight into Egypt; His crucifixion and resurrection and promise of His return could be paralleled with the Children of Israel being born through the miracle baby, Isaac, the only legitimate son of Abraham; their flight into Egyptian bondage; and the promise that they would return again from exile to settle in the Promised Land of the New Israel. One might go further by recalling that as the Romans crucified the Son of God, so were the Jews crucified in like manner by the Romans, just 40 years later in 70 AD when the Roman general Titus took Jerusalem. The Magi did not ask for a Messiah, or a Savior, or a Prophet, but explicitly referred to the One they were looking for as “King of the Judeans.” He did not become King by birth in a royal, human family; He was already a divine King born to inherit a heavenly kingdom already promised through His royal ancestor David.