Il.
ῥηθέν ὑπὸ] Ἱερεμίου τοῦ προφήτου, λέγονταν, 18. “«Φωνὴ ἐν ‘Papa © Ch. xiii. ἠκούσθη, θρῆνος Kai? *ndaudpis kal ‘éSuppds πολύς, “Paxhd
(266i. κλαίουσα τὰ τέκνα αὐτῆς: καὶ οὐκ ἤθελε 3 19. Τελευτήσαντος δὲ τοῦ 'Ἠρώδου, ἰδού, ἄγγελος Κυρίου Ἰωσὴφ ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ, 20. λέγων, '' Ἐγερθεὶς
g with oo εἰσί.'΄' here only. * κατ ὄναρ φαίνεται” τῷ
παρακληθῆναι, ὅτι οὐκ
παράλαβε τὸ παιδίον καὶ τὴν µητέρα αὐτοῦ, καὶ πορεύου εἰς γῆν
h Rom. xi. 3.
Ἰσραήλ: τεθνήκασι γὰρ οἱ “{Lnrodvres τὴν ψυχὴν τοῦ παιδίου.”'
i Rev. v. 10 21. Ὁ δὲ ἐγερθεὶς παρέλαβε τὸ παιδίον καὶ τὴν μητέρα αὐτοῦ, καὶ
(with ἐπέν
and gen.). ἦλθεν ὃ εἰς γῆν Ἰσραήλ.
22. ἀκούσας δὲ ὅτι Αρχέλαος ! βασιλεύει
δια in NBCD ; νπο not acc. to style of Evang. (Weiss in Meyer). Άθρηνος και om. WBZ ; probably introduced to correspond with Sept.
1ηθελησε in DZ. * φαινεται κατ ovap, NBDZ. 5 κισηλθεν in NBC.
suggesting a fulfilment not regarded as exclusive. The words, even in their original place, are highly imaginative. The scene of Rachel weeping for her children is one of several tableaux, which passed before the prophet’s eye in a vision, in a dream which, on awaking, he felt to be sweet. It was poetry to begin with, and it is poetry here. Rachel again weeps over her children; hers, because she was buried there, the pro- phet’s Ramah, near Gibeah, north of Jerusalem, standin
to the south. prophetic passage did not create the massacre ; the tradition of the massacre recalled to mind the prophecy, and led to its being quoted, though of doubtful appositeness in a strict sense. Jacob’s beloved wife seems to have occupied an imaginative place also in Rabbinical literature. Winsche quotes this from the Midrasch : ‘‘ Why did Jacob bury Rachel on the way to Ephratah or Bethlehem? (Gen. xxxv. 16). Because he foresaw that the exiles would at some future time pass that way, and he buried her there that she might pray for them” (Beiirdge, p. 11). el was to the Hebrew fancy a mother for Israel in all time, sympathetic in all her children's
misfortunes. Vv. 19-21. tae? i return. Τελεντ- ήσαντος δὲ τ. Herod died in 750
u.c. in his ae year, at Jericho, of a horrible loathsome disease, rotten in body as in soul, altogether an unwhole- some man (vide oe Bell, i. 33, 1-5; Antiq., xvii. 6, 5
6, 8). The news of his death’ would fly swiftly, and would not take long to reach Egypt. There would be no need
of an angel to inform Joseph of the fact. But his anxieties would not therefore be atanend. Who was to succeed Herod? Might he not be another of the same type? Might disorder and confusion not arise? Would it be safe or wise to
return to Palestine? Guidance was
(ear? iat The anxious thoughts of the daytime are reflected in the dream by night, and the angelic message comes to put an end to uncertainty.—ver. 20. "EyepOds . . . Ἰσραήλ: it is the same terms as those of the mettage directing flight to t, except ο course fiat th the tend f aifierent’ and the order not flee but return, ‘‘ Arise, take the child and His mother.” The words were as a refrain in the life of Joseph in those critical months.—rev4- κασι yap: in this general manner is the death of Herod referred to, as if in studious avoidance of the dreaded name. They are dead. The plural here (οἱ ζητοῦντες), as often, αν. - a general idea, a class, though only a single person is meant (vide Winer, § 27, 2, and Exodus iv. 19). But the manner of ex- pression may indicate a desire to dissi-
te completely Joseph’s apprehensions. There is nothing, no person to fear: ol Ver. 21. ὁ δὲ ἐγερθεὶς . . . Ἴσρα prompt obedience forts but Parte (ver. 14) is omitted this time. Joseph may wait till day; the matter is not so urgent. Then the word was evye. It was a flight for life, every hour or minute important,