I. 1. "ΒΙΒΛΟΣ *yevécews ΙΗΣΟΥ Χριστοῦ, "υἱοῦ Δαβίδ, υἱοῦ * Gen. ii. 4. » ΄ > \ + beet] yo > J ‘ Waa eat x Lk. iii. 9 Ἀβραάμ. 2. ABpadp ἐγέννησε τὸν Ἰσαάκ: ᾿Ισαὰκ δὲ ἐγέννησε τὸν ο ted 4
A _ b ver. 18. C Xil. 23; XXxi.g; xxii. 42.
Gen. xxxi. 13; xxxii.9. Lk. i. 14. Jas. i. 23; iii, 6.
1 The title in T.R. (as above) is late. QB have simply Kata Μαθθαιον. Other expanded forms occur.
2 Λαβιδ is found only in minusc. WB have Aaved. This is one of several variations in spelling occurring in the genealogy, among which may be named Poof (ver. 5) = βοες in W.H.; QBnd (ver. 5) = lwByd, W.H.; Ματθαν (ver. 15) = Μαθθαν, W.H. For a list of such variations in the spelling of names in the three first
Gospels vide p. 53.
ΤΗΕ Tire. The use of the word ev- αγγέλιον in the sense of a book may be as old as the Teaching of the twelve Apostles (Didache, 8, 11, 15. Vide Sanday, Bamp- ton Lectures, 1893, Ρ. 317, n. 1). The word passed through three stages in the history of its use. First, in the older Greek authors (Hom., Od. &, 152, 166), a reward for bringing good tidings ; also a thank-offering tor good tidings brought (Arist., Eq. 656). Next, in later Greek, the good tidings itself (2 Sam. xviii. 20, 22, 25, in Sept. In 2 Sam. iv. 10, εὖ- αγγέλια occurs in the earliest sense). This sense pervades the N. T. in re- ference to the good news of God, “he message of salvation. Finally, it came very naturally to denote the books in which the Gospel of Jesus was presented in historic form, as in the Didache and in Justin M., 4βοῖ. i. 66, Dial. con. Tryp. too. In the titles of the Gospels the word retains its second sense, while sug- gesting the third. evayy. κατὰ M. means the good news as reduced to writing by Μ. κατὰ is not=of, nor κατὰ Ματθαῖον Ξ Ματθαίου, as if the sense were: The book called a ‘‘ Gospel” written by Mat- thew. (Vide Fritzsche against this the older view, supported by Kuinoel.)
CHAPTER I. THE GENEALOGY AND BirtuH oF JEsus.—The genealogy may
readily appear to us a most ungenial beginning of the Gospel. A dry list of names! It is the tribute which the Gospel pays to the spirit of Judaism. The Jews set much store by genealogies, and to Jewish Christians the Messiah- ship of Jesus depended on its being proved that He was a descendant of David. But the matter can hardly be so vital as that. We may distinguish between the question of fact and the question of faith. It may be that Jesus was really descended from David—many things point that way; but even if He were not He might still be the Christ, the fulfiller of O. T, ideals, the bringer-in of the highest good, if He possessed the proper spiritual qualifications. What although the Christ were not David’s son in the physical sense? He was a priest after the order of Melchisedec, though ἀγενεαλόγητος; why not Messiah under the same conditions? He might still be a son of David in the sense in which John the Baptist was Elijah—in spirit and power, realising the ideal of the hero king. The kingdom of prophecy came only in a spiritual sense, why not also the king? The two hang together. Paul was not an apostle in the legitimist sense, not one of the men who had been with Jesus; yet he was a very real apostle.
62
Ιακώβ. ἆ similar ΄ const.in 3.