Christ was on this wise) By this most ancient reading 1 the text refers to ver. 17, and the advent of the Messiah, expected for so many generations, is declared and exhibited (exserte demon- stratur) to the reader. Thus, too, the words, gyswjjS»j, (was generated), and ybvjjff/f, (generation), refer mutually to each other. The particle 8s (however) subserves both references. In like manner, the name " JESUS" is repeated in ch. ii. 1, from ch. i. 25. In later ages, most of the Greek copyists have added 'l^ffoD2 (the genitive case of 'l^tfoDj, Jesus) before Xf/oroD (the genitive case of Xpiffroc, Christ), according to which reading, the expres sion would refer with less force to either the first or sixteenth verse indifferently. It was the CHRIST whom Mary had in her womb by the Holy Ghost, and whom Joseph, aftenvards, by the command of the angel, called JESUS. Elegantly, and in ac cordance with the order of events, the name JESUS is reserved till ver. 21, 25. — Cf. Gnomon on Luke ii. 11. The word ym?j<r/s (generation) includes (ver. 18—25) both the Conception (cf. yswrfitvj conceived, ver. 20) and the Nativity (cf. yewrfrfi/ros, having been born, ii. 1). For ver. 18 contains the introductory statement (propositionem)s of those matters which follow, to which, also, the oUrwg (thus, or on this wise) refers : and the con junction yap (for) commences the handling of the subject (trac- tationeni), which corresponds with the introductory statement. — Cf. the use of yap in Heb. ii. S.4 The particle ovrug guards us from thinking, on account of the preceding genealogy, that Joseph was the natural father of Jesus. — i^vrtcrt^iio^ yap rr,s
1 In Matt. i. 18, we know how it was read in the second century from Irenseus, who (after having previously cited the words, " Christi autem gene- ratio sic erat") continues, " Ceterum potuerat dicere Matthseus, Jesu vero generatio sic erat ; sed prsevidens Spiritus Sanctus depravatores, et pnemu- niens contra fraudulentiam eorum, per Matthseum ait : Christi autem generatio sic erat." — (C. H. lib. iii. 16, 2.) TREGELLES. — (I. B.)
PZ and Rec. Text read 'IwoiJ yLpiarov, which, therefore, Lachmann pre fers. B, and Origen 3, 96od read X/>/<rro£ 'Iww. But Iren. 191, 204, and abed Vulg. read only Xpiarov, which Tischendorf prefers. — ED.
2 Such is the reading of E. M., viz., rov i>i 'Iwov XJWOTOW, X..T.K. — (I. B.)
8 Propositio and Tractatio are terms regularly used by Bengel in his Introductory Synopses in the technical and rhetorical sense. — ED.
4 Lachmann omits y«p with BZabc Vulg. Iren. 204. Tischendorf, with less weight of authorities, retains it, viz., of the oldest, Pd. — ED.
ST MATTHEW I. 19. Ill
AdroS Map/as, For after His mother Mary had been be trothed) The LXX. render the Hebrew BHN (to betroth) by /ti/Tj- ffTtvopat in Deut. xx. 7, etc. — irpiv 5j (TuvsX^s/i/ avrous, before they came together) Joseph had not yet even brought Mary home (see ver. 20) ; but in these words, and the more firmly on that ac count, the commercium tori is specifically denied, in order to assert her pregnancy by the Holy Spirit. Nor does the expres sion, <irph tj (before), imply that they came together after our Lord's birth. — sLps^rj sv ycterpi t%pv4a sx Hvtv/J,u,ro$ ' Ayfou, she teas found with child of the Holy Ghost) There can be no doubt but that Mary disclosed to Joseph (perhaps when he proposed to consummate their marriage) the sacred pregnancy, which she had concealed from every one else. — Jx, of) The expression sx Tlvtv- paro$ ' Aylov (of the Holy Spirit) occurs again at ver. 20. See, also, John iii. 6.
19. dixaioe, just1) It is disputed in what sense this epithet is applied to Joseph. The thing is clear. Joseph wished to put away Mary, and he also wished to put her away privately. The Evangelist indicates the cause of both wishes. Why did he wish to do it privately ? Because he was unwilling to publish the matter, and exact the penalty which the law permitted in the case of women guilty, or suspected, of adultery, and thus to make an example of one, whose sanctity he had in other re spects so greatly revered. But why did he wish to put her away at all ? We learn from the context. Because he was just (Justus), and did not think it reputable (honestum) to retain as his wife one who appeared to have broken her conjugal faith. His thoughts were many and conflicting ; his mind was in doubt. St Matthew expresses this with great beauty, by a phraseology somewhat ambiguous in this its brevity ; for Greek participles may be resolved into the corresponding verbs with the conjunc tions although, because, or since : [and ^ $'e\uv, therefore, may be rendered either although he was unwilling, because he was un willing, or since he did not wish]. Elsewhere dixaiog is some times found with the signification of yielding and kind, as in-