quendam or quosdam. Justin. V. 9. miserunt, qui eum interciperent. The example from Acts xix. 31. and the like, cited by Bos, are not precisely analogous. In Toùç Taīdas the masculine article plainly denotes that the male children only were slain. Instances indeed occur where the masculine article is used with nouns of the common gender in reference to the whole species, both male and female; but in these cases the application is generally manifest from the subject or occasion. Besides, the historian seems purposely to have changed the word audiov, which is also used for child in this chapter; as that word, being neuter, could not mark the distinction of sex. Neither would it have furthered Herod's purpose to have slaughtered female children, as they could not have become kings of Israel. The term ἀπὸ STOUç is considered in v. 1. Of the motives which induced Herod to issue this barbarous order, and of the silence of Josephus upon the subject, see Horne's Introd. Vol. III. p. 98. and Vol. I. p. 629. (Append. No. 3. §. 7.) respectively. Ver. 17. TÓTε ETλnpwon. This citation is evidently only an accommodation of the prophecy of Jerem. xxxi. 15. See Horne's Introd. Vol. II. p. 458. The prediction itself applies only to Nebuzaradan at Ramah, the only place named by the prophet; whereas the massacre of the infants was at Bethlehem. Besides, the persons to whom the prophecy applies were not slaughtered, but, on the contrary, their return from captivity is expressly foretold, vv. 16, 17. The adaptation, however, of the prediction to the murder of the innocents, has a peculiar beauty in it. Rachel being buried in the fields of Bethlehem, (Gen. xlviii. 7.) is represented, in a poetical hyperbole, as awaked by the cries of her children, who were slaughtered near her. Others have supposed that the prophecy is not simply accommodated by St. Matthew, but that it received a second and more perfect fulfilment in the event here recorded. MARSH, MACKNIGHT, LIGHTFOOT, GROTIUS.-[WHITBY, MICHAELIS.] Ver. 18. θρήνος καὶ κλαυθμὸς καὶ ὀδυρμός. In some of the copies the words Оoñvoç kaì are wanting, and the Vulgate has only Ploratus et ululatus multus. The LXX has the passage in full, though there are but two corresponding words in the original. The accumulated expression, which Matthew adopted from the Greek translation, beautifully expresses the aggravated grief of the mourners. Of the expression ouk sivaι, signifying to be dead, see my note on Hom. II. B. 641. - Ver. 20. τεθνήκασι γὰρ οἱ ζητοῦντες κ. τ. λ. The same words are used of Moses in Exod. iv. 19. LIGHTFOOT, GROTIUS. It is evident that Herod only is intended; the plural instead of the singular, in cases of emphasis, being frequently employed by the best writers. See my note on Soph. Ed. T. 336. Pent. Gr. Αρχέλαος. Ver. 22. 'Apxλaoç. He had the government of Judæa, Sa- Ver. 23. siç módiv. For iv róλet. So Joseph. Ant. XX. 1. Ibid. ὅτι Ναζωραῖος κληθήσεται. In order to illustrate this passage, some of the commentators have found a coincidence be- tween the gentile noun here employed and the Hebrew name for a Nazarite; and others derive it from a word signifying branch, in reference to the prophecy of Isaiah, xi. 1. But the most probable interpretation is that given in Horne's Introd. Vol. II. p. 391. note. Dr. Middleton would translate the Nazarene Kar' oxýv. The article could not be inserted in the Greek. See on Ch. I. I. on the Greek article, §. II. 2. p. 10. CONTENTS: JOHN THE BAPTIST; his Manner of Life, and Ministry, vv. 1-12. [Mark i. 2-8. more fully Luke iii. Verse 1. Ev Tais ημépais έkeivais. In those days, i. e. some time before Christ left Nazareth, the last thing mentioned being his residence in that city; and the events in this and the preceding chapter being connected by the particle dé. The particle indeed is wanting in several MSS., but it is nevertheless undoubtedly genuine; as it is far easier to account for its omission than its insertion. Now John was about six months older than Christ, and as each most probably entered upon their ministry in his 30th year, according to the practice of the Levitical law, (Numb. iv. 3.) it may fairly be conjectured that the former entered upon his ministry so much earlier. See on Luke iii. 1. The use of nuépa in the plural is not unusual in the N. T. as, for instance, in Matt. xxiii. 30. Luke ii. 6. xix. 42. et passim, but it is extremely rare in Attic. We have, however, ev vorépaιow nμépais, Æsch. Agam. 1656. for which Sophocles says v voτÉOY XPÓvų, Ed. C. 641. Also Thucyd. VII. 33. Tερì τàs avràs nμépas. Pind. Οl. I. 3. ἁμέραι δ ̓ ἐπίλοιποι μάρτυρες σοφώτατοι. See Blomfield's Gloss. on Esch. 1. c. In the same sense we find illis diebus, Virg. Æn. II. 340. Liv. XXVII. 15. CAMPBELL, SCHLEUSNER. Βαπτιστής. Ibid. & Barriors. A title of his office, not a proper name, but equivalent to ó Barilov, Mark vi. 14. That baptism had been in use among the Jews as a religious ordinance, before the ministry of John, has been disputed by the learned; though it should seem without reason. The fact is not expressly asserted in Scripture; but there is still very little doubt that it formed part of the ceremony of the admission of Gentile proselytes into the Jewish religion. The Persians were not only acquainted with the rite, but practised it upon infants. Pro infantibus utuntur Baptismo, seu lotione, ad animæ purificationem internam : Hyde de Rel. vet. Pers. c. 34. It is therefore highly probable that the Jews, with whom several Oriental customs prevailed, retained this among the rest. The Talmuds indeed affirm that a person is not a proselyte till he be both circumcised and baptized, and a convert to Judaism is expressly called by Arrian Beßauuevos, (Epict. II. 9.) which seems decisive on the subject. Besides, there is allusion to the use of baptism in the consecration of priests more than once in the O. T. (Levit. viii. 6. Exod. xxix. 4.) and it was confidently expected from a passage in Zech. xiii. 1. that it would form part of the office of the Messiah, or those connected with him. See John i. 25. In short, the very manner in which the account of John's baptism is introduced by the Evangelist is alone sufficient to prove that its use was already familiar to those for whom he wrote. The term itself is used without the slightest explanation; his disciples make no enquiry respecting the nature of the rite, and the only doubt that seems to have arisen in their minds relates to the authority of John in administering it. It must be allowed that they had a very poor idea of the real intent and signification of the ceremony, from which they ought to have inferred the necessity of a change in their opinions and practices, similar to that required of the baptized proselyte, together with an entire and exclusive reception of the religion of the Gospel, into which they were received with the same forms as those with which the Jewish converts renounced the errors of Heathenism and Idolatry, and conformed to the Mosaic dispensation. LIGHTFOOT, MACKNIGHT, WHITBY. Ibid. iv ry onμe rns 'Iovdaías. See Horne's Introd. Vol. III. Part I. Ch. II. §. 8. The participle knoúσowv is here properly applied to the Baptist as the herald or harbinger of the Messiah; and wherever the verb or its derivatives are used in the N. T. or the LXX, it is almost universally in reference to a thing published or proclaimed. In the present instance the Baptist's proclamation is contained in the words of the succeeding verse. Compare Matt. iv. 17. x. 7. Luke xxiv. 47. Acts xxviii. 31. Jonah iii. 2. LXX. Hence the word is distinct from evayyedí?w, to preach the Gospel, karayyśλλw, to announce, daλew, to speak, Siaλtyopai, to discourse, and didáσkev, to teach; all of which are rendered to preach in the E. T. CAMPBELL. Ver. 2. μεTavoεTE. E. T. Repent ye. In this translation no great impropriety exists, as it is generally agreed among theologians that the repentance inculcated in the Gospel comprehends such a reformation of life as will be permanent and lasting. The verb μeravosiv includes this comprehensive sense, denoting a change for the better; in which it differs essentially from uerauéAeola, which implies simply a change, whether it be for the better or the worse. In the LXX indeed the two verbs are synonymously employed; but there is a marked distinction between them in the N. T. the first corresponding more nearly with the English to reform, the latter with to repent. The difference is obvious: every one who reforms repents; but every one who repents does not necessarily reform. Hence, wherever the change of mind, which the preposition μɛrà denotes, is inculcated as a duty, or the necessity of it stated as a doctrine of Christianity, the terms are invariably μετανοεῖν and μετάνοια. Compare Mark vi. 12. Luke xiii. 3. 5. Acts ii. 38. xxvi. 20. and elsewhere. On the other hand, whenever a mere sorrow is intended, which does not necessarily imply reformation, these terms are never used, but always μεταμέλεσθαι and μεταμέλεια. Thus, the repentance of Judas, which drove him to despair, is expressed by ueraμeλnfeìs, Matt. xxvii. 3. In 2 Cor. vii. 10. St. Paul has employed both words, so as clearly to mark the difference: ἡ κατὰ θεὸν λύπη μετάνοιαν εἰς σωτηρίαν ἀμεταμέλητον κατεργάζεται. Had the two words been convertible the Apostle would doubtless have used the adjective dueravónτov, as in Rom. ii. 5. in order to preserve the paranomasia, which is given, but improperly, in the Ê. T. It is the opinion of Grotius that this distinction is not well founded, but the passages upon which he forms his judgment, viz. Matt. xxi. 29. Heb. xii. 17. are not to the point. CAMpbell. Ibid. ἤγγικε γὰρ κ. τ. λ. The synonymous expressions ή βασιλεία τῶν οὐρανῶν, and ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ θεοῦ, which recur perpetually in the N. T. are not only used to denote in their most direct sense, the regions of endless felicity in heaven, as in Matt. v. 10. 12. vii. 21, 22, 23. Mark ix. 46, 47. and elsewhere, but also, in manifest allusion to the prophecies of the O. T. and particularly Dan. ii. 44. vii. 13, 14. to represent the spiritual kingdom of Christ, or the Gospel dispensation. This latter sense evidently belongs to this place; and so also Matt. iv. 17. x. 7. Luke x. 9. xvii. 21. and elsewhere, where it is said to be at hand again, when Christ is said to preach the Gospel of the kingdom, as in Mark i. 14. Luke xvi. 16. and elsewhere; in almost all the parables that speak of it, and probably in Matt. xi. 11, 12. xiii. 11. 19. 52. xvi. 19. xx. 21. xxiii. 13. Mark xii. 34. Luke xiv. 15. In some places it is doubtful which of the two senses is to be affixed to the term. See Matt. v. 3. 19, 20. vi. 33. viii. 11. xix. 12. 24. Mark x. 14, 15. 23. sqq. Luke xviii. 29. xxii. 29. That the two expressions are synonymous is evident from Matt. iv. 17. v. 3. xi. 11. xiii. 11. xix. 14. with Luke vi. 20. Marki. 15. Luke vii. 28. Mark iv. 11. x. 14. respectively. It is clear that the English word kingdom does not clearly designate the latter of the two acceptations in which the phrase is used, as denoting the epoch or æra of the Gospel dispensation, which would be more correctly expressed by the word reign. It is proper to remark that the form, yyuke yap, used first by the Baptist, then by our Lord himself, and lastly by his disciples in his life-time, is never repeated after his resurrection. It is also to be observed, that oùpavòs in the singular implies simply the sky, whereas oupavoì, in the plural, is equivalent to the Hebrew reduplication_' ', i. e. the heaven of heavens, the throne of God, and thence metaphorically, God himself; as in Dan. iv. 26. Psal. lxxiii. 9, WHITBY, LIGHTFOOT, CAMPBELL. The perfect yyuke is here used for the present. See Matt. Gr. Gr. §. 500. Viger, de Idiom. p. 166. and Hermann ad loc. Ver. 3. 'Hoaíov тоυ πродýτоν. Chap. xl. 3. The words of the Evangelist agree in sense, though not exactly in terms, both with the Hebrew and the LXX. Instead of aurou the LXX reads To Оεov nuov, with which the Hebrew agrees, and adds in the desert. We have the same citation in Mark i. 3. and more at length in Luke iii. 4-6. The custom to which the prophet alludes is amply illustrated in Horne's Introd. Vol. III. pp. 92, 93. Ver. 4. ἔνδυμα ἀπὸ τριχῶν καμήλου. There were two species of cloth made of camel's hair: of the finer hair a beautiful stuff was manufactured, similar to that which is now, though made of wool, called camlet; and of the long shaggy hair a much coarser material was made, of a texture somewhat like that of the cloth now used to lay over goods. Of this latter, no doubt, was the garment worn by the Baptist, and the like, as Chardin assures us, together with great leathern girdles, are worn by the Eastern dervises to this day. According to the Rabbinical writers, the Nazarites wore a similar garment: but though John was a Nazarite, it is more probable that he used the habit in question in imitation of the prophets, (Zech. xiii. 4.) and more especially of Elijah, who was clad in precisely the same way. See 2 Kings i. 8. In the |