Chrestum solent dicere.

Erat Judæis ante præceptum, ut sa

crum conficerent unguentum, quo perungi possent ii, qui vocabantur ad sacerdotium vel ad regnum. Et sicut nunc Romanis indumentum purpuræ insigne est regiæ dignitatis adsumptæ, sic illis unctio sacri unguenti nomen ac potestatem regiam conferebat. See also Horsley's Sermons, Vol. 1. Sermon 9. p. 188.

Without the article however, it is to be understood, not as an appellation, but as a proper name: and some distinction was necessary, as the name Jesus was common among the Jews, about our Saviour's time. And so prevalent did the name of Christ become, that Tacitus, Suetonius, Pliny, and oi ew distinguish him by no other. Whence the Jews who would not acknowledge Jesus to be the Christ, began to call the Messiah whom they expected, no longer Χριστός but ἠλειμμένος.

That the name of Jesus is so often added to the name of Christ in the New Testament is not only that thereby Christ might be pointed out for the Saviour (which the name of Jesus signifies, see v. 21) but also that Jesus might be pointed out for the true Christ; against the unbelief of the Jews, who denied that Jesus of Nazareth was he.

Mill omits XpioTOû because it is not in the Ethiopic version, and he thinks there is no need of it, as St. Matthew's intention is to shew, not that Jesus Christ was descended from David; because it was notorious to all that the Messiah must descend from him; but that Jesus of Nazareth was of the seed of David and Abraham. Prol. 1213. But is it reasonable to place so much authority in one version, to the overlooking so many others as well as MSS?

-vioû] i. e. drоyóvov, according to the flesh. Acts ii. 30:

Rom. ix. 5. In the same manner the Hebrews used the corresponding word for all who were lineally descended from the person spoken of. vioù here anarthrous: see Middleton Gr. Art. p. 163.

-Aaßid] In some of the old MSS. there is a different reading here, Aavid: but in general it is abbreviated and written Aad, omitting the third and fourth letters. It may be observed that in the generations which follow, sometimes one and sometimes another name is omitted in different MSS., and there is sometimes a great discrepancy in the orthography of the proper

names.

-vioù Aaßid] See Pearson on the Creed, Vol. 1. p. 136: and South's Sermons, Vol. III. Sermon 7. By no more ordinary and more proper name did the Jewish nation point out the Mes

Isiah than by the Son of David. And not only in the New Testament, (see Matth. xii. 23: xxi. 9: xxii. 42: Luke xviii. 38.) but in the writings of the Jews we find continual mention of "Messiah the Son of David," and the "Son of David" κar' ἐξοχὴν. It occurs no less than seven times in one section of the Talmudical book, Sanhedrin.

Chrysostom says David is named here before Abraham, because he was nearest the time of Jesus; and being a great King as well as prophet, and an illustrious type of Christ, he is fitly enough named first; especially since the Jews expected the Messias of the lineage and family of David. See Kidder 11. p. 164.

-vioù Aßpaau] Which Wetstein thinks belongs to David. But it may be referred to Christ, and perhaps with more propriety on account of the particular promises made by God to each that the Messiah should be born of their seed. To Abraham (Gal. iii. 16.) the promise was that of a Son in whom all the nations of the earth should be blessed; Gen. xii. 3: xxii. 18: xxvi. 4 xxviii. 14: To David of a Son whose reign should be eternal, 2 Sam. vii. 12: Psal. lxxxix. 4: cxxxii. 11: Isai. ix. 7: xi. 1 Jer. xxiii. 5: xxxiii. 15. These promises the Jews expected should be accomplished in the person of the Messiah, Luke i. 32, 69. And it was from this particular expectation that those who believed Jesus to be their Messiah called him the Son of David.

And besides that the promises were made to these two in plainer terms than to any other; one of them was the Father of the Jewish nation, and the other the first in the kingdom; of which nation and kingdom all the prophecies had told that Christ should come. Whence we observe that when God promises not to destroy his people, it is on account of Abraham, not David: but when he declares he will not destroy the kingdom, it is for David's sake, not Abraham's.

-'Aßpadu] Erasmus 1, 2, and Stephens 1, 2, write after the Septuagint, Aßpadu with an aspirate, which is properly rejected, as it should be in 'Eoaias, 'Exías, &c.

2. Aßpadu] St. Matthew begins his reckoning from Abraham to whom the first promise of the kingdom was made, Gen. xvii. 6. St. Luke runs his line up to Adam the first head and fountain of human nature; which fairly shews that one deduced only his title to the crown, the other the natural descent of his humanity.

·éyévvnoe] The frequent repetition of this verb, Rosenmüller thinks, originated in the Hebrew manner of expression. And Middleton (Gr. Art. p. 164) remarks that throughout the

whole of this genealogy there is an use of the article, which is wholly foreign from the Greek practice, and which in some degree favours the historical account of the original of St. Matthew's Gospel. The Greek usage, he says, would require Ἀβραὰμ ἐγέννησεν Ἰσαὰκ· ὁ δὲ Ἰσαὰκ ἐγέννησεν Ιακωβ· &c., thus introducing the article on the repetition of each proper name; the very reverse of which here takes place.

-TOV 'loadK] See Gen. xxi. 2: xxv. 24: xxix. 35.

-Tous adeλpous] The brethren of Judah are mentioned, τοὺς though not by name, in this genealogy, because though the Messiah was to arise out of the tribe of Judah, they were on an equal footing with Judah in respect of religious privileges. To them belonged the promises, their posterity had the law given to them, and though not returned from the captivity they had an equal interest in the blessing promised to the seed of Abraham, Acts vii. 8. See Chrysost. Hom. 5, on St. Matth. It was otherwise with Ishmael and Esau, though the one was the son of Abraham, and the other of Isaac. They and their posterity were excluded from the privileges of the covenant, for which reason they are not mentioned in Messiah's genealogy. See Chrysost. Hom. 3. on St. Matth. So also Theophylact.

It may be remembered too that St. Matthew was an Israelite and wrote his Gospel for the Jews. The sons of Jacob were the heads of that people from whence Christ was to proceed, and heirs of the promise; and therefore St. Matthew would not, as Bishop Kidder observes, pass them by altogether.

3. Tov Dapès Kai Tov Zapȧ] See Gen. xxxviii. 27: 1 Chron. ii. 4: Ruth iv. 18. Zara is here mentioned to prevent any mistake. For as it was no uncommon thing among the Jews to have several children of the same name, we might have been apt to imagine, considering the circumstances of his birth (Gen. xxxviii. 28.) that this Pharez had been some other Son of Judah. But Zarah and Thamar being mentioned, the matter is beyond doubt. Wetstein thinks Zarah here mentioned, and the brethren of Judah v. 2. and of Jechonias v. 11. designedly, in order to answer an objection of the Jews, from not seeing any reason why Jesus was preferred to James, Joses, Simon and Judas, xiii. 55, 57.

Oduap] It was not usual in the genealogies of the Jews to insert the names of women: and here perhaps they are only introduced because in the four cases mentioned the law was departed from, which was given generally to the Heirs of the promised blessing, that they should take them wives of their

nearest kindred: or possibly to obviate any cavils of the Jews against the mean condition of the mother of our Lord; their ancestors being descended from women whose manners rendered them infinitely meaner than the mother of Christ. For they are all branded in history with a mark of infamy; viz. Thamar for incest, Rahab (if of Jericho) for fornication, Ruth for heathenism, and Bathsheba for adultery. This is Episcopius's opinion (Oper. Tom. II. Part. 2). The former seems the more probable reason. 4. Apau] See 1 Chron. ii. 10, 11.

Αμιναδάβ] In some, Αμιναδαβ, and Αμιναδάμ, which last may have arisen from the termination of the preceding word Apau, or from so many names ending in au, Roboam, Joram, Joatham, Abraham; or because it is unusual for a Greek name to end in ẞ; or because of the similarity of the letters in the MSS. 5. 'Paxáß] From Ruth iv. 21; and 1 Chron. ii. 11. we learn that Boaz was the son of Salmon. But that Rachab was the mother of Boaz, we cannot find any trace in the Old Testament: so that the Genealogist must have had recourse to tradition, or to the public registers of the tribe of Judah and of the other tribes that adhered to it, which were kept even in the captivity, as may be collected from the Books of Ezra and Nehemiah, and from St. Luke's telling us that Anna was of the tribe of Aser, and St. Paul that himself was of the tribe of Benjamin. See v. 14.

It has been a question amongst Interpreters, whether the Rahab here mentioned is Rahab the harlot of Jericho (Josh. ii. 1.) or not. Theophylact was of opinion that she was not; and his opinion has been embraced by several modern Commentators. That she was, as all the other women mentioned in this list, a remarkable person, can scarcely be doubted: nor can any motive be assigned which should have induced St. Matthew to mention her in the genealogy of Christ, unless she were some person previously spoken of in Scripture: but many reasons may be assigned why she should be introduced in the lineage, if she were the Rahab whose conduct is mentioned by Joshua. That she was one of the idolatrous nations with which the Israelites were forbidden to marry, Exod. xxxiv. 16: Deut. vii. 3. hinders not her marriage with Salmon, she having become a proselyte of Justice; the reason of that law being lest they should tempt them to idolatry, which reason would cease upon their owning the God of Israel: or the prohibition might not take place till they entered into the Holy Land.

But it has been inferred from Chronological reasons that the

Rachab here mentioned must have been one who lived later than Rahab of Jericho. For, if not, the time betwixt Salmon and David must have been at least three hundred years, and only Booz, Obed, and Jesse intervene; unless we admit that the sacred writers mentioned in the Genealogy such names only as were distinguished and known amongst the Jews, (see Bp. Gray's Key to the Old Testament, Ruth, p. 163). Supposing, however, these to be the only persons intervening, and from their extraordinary piety, as Usher thinks, (Chron. Sac. c. 12) of a longer life than ordinary, Dr. Allix makes Salmon beget Booz when ninety-six years old, Booz beget Obed when ninety, Obed beget Jesse when ninety, and Jesse beget David when eighty-five.

The civil records to avouch for the truth of these Genealogies being now lost, though at the time there was no difficulty with respect to those of the royal family in particular; the later Jews unjustly cavil, and have broached the tenet that Rahab married Joshua; but unfortunately for their consistency they make her the mother of eight priests and prophets; yet Joshua was neither of the tribe of Judah nor Levi, but of Ephraim, Numb. xiii. 8.

'Pove] The Moabitess. The son of a Moabite by an Israelitish woman could never be allowed to enter into the congregation of the Lord; i. e. at least he was rendered incapable of being a prince in Israel, and perhaps even of being naturalized by circumcision, (Deut. xxiii. 3). But from this instance it appears that the precept was not understood as excluding the descendants of an Israelite by a Moabitish woman from any hereditary honours and privileges. From Ruth iv. 13, we find Booz thought himself obliged to marry her.

These are omitted

6. • Baoircus] See 1 Sam. xvi. 1, &c. in some MSS. and versions, but probably repeated honoris causâ : see 1 Kings i. 1, 13, 28, 31, 32, 37, 38, 43, 47, from which it is plain that the repetition is not unusual with the sacred writers.

In this genealogy David has the title of King, because the Tesseradecads being adapted to the various states of the Israelites from Abraham to Jesus, David being the origin of the second state, was the first King of his family, and had the kingdom entailed upon his children. It is true, ten of the twelve tribes revolted from Rehoboam, David's grandson: nevertheless the promise of God remained sure: for an end was soon put to the kingdom of the ten tribes: whereas the kingdom of the two tribes was of much longer duration, not to mention that the tribe of Judah, out of which Messiah was to spring, was one of the two that continued their allegiance to David's family.

B