Matthew 2:19

We have here Christ's return out of Egypt into the land of Israel again. Egypt may serve to sojourn in, or take shelter in, for a while, but not to abide in. Christ was sent to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, and therefore to them he must return. Observe,

I. What it was that made way for his return - the death of Herod, which happened not long after the murder of the infants; some think not above three months. Such quick work did divine vengeance make! Note, Herods must die; proud tyrants, that were the terror of the mighty, and the oppressors of the godly, in the land of the living, their day must come to fall, and down to the pit they must go. Who art thou then, that thou shouldest be afraid of a man that shall die? (Isa 51:12, Isa 51:13) especially considering that at death, not only their envy and hatred are perished (Ecc 9:6), and they cease from troubling (Job 3:17), but they are punished. Of all sins, the guilt of innocent blood fills the measure soonest. It is a dreadful account which Josephus gives of the death of this same Herod (Antiq. 17.146-199), that he was seized with a disease which burned him inwardly with an inexpressible torture; that he was insatiably greedy of meat; had the colic, and gout, and dropsy; such an intolerable stench attended his disease, that none could come near him: and so passionate and impatient was he, that he was a torment to himself, and a terror to all that attended him: his innate cruelty, being thus exasperated, made him more barbarous than ever; having ordered his own son to be put to death, he imprisoned many of the nobility and gentry, and ordered that as soon as he was dead they should be killed; but that execution was prevented. See what kind of men have been the enemies and persecutors of Christ and his followers! Few have opposed Christianity but such as have first divested themselves of humanity, as Nero and Domitian.

II. The orders given from heaven concerning their return, and Joseph's obedience to those orders, Mat 2:19-21. God had sent Joseph into Egypt, and there he staid till the same that brought him thither ordered him thence. Note, In all our removes, it is good to see our way plain, and God going before us; we should not move either one way or the other without order. These orders were sent him by an angel. Note, Our intercourse with God, if it be kept up on our part, shall be kept up on his, wherever we are. No place can exclude God's gracious visits. Angels come to Joseph in Egypt, to Ezekiel in Babylon, and to John in Patmos. Now, 1. The angel informs him of the death of Herod and his accomplices: They are dead, which sought the young Child's life. They are dead, but the young Child lives. Persecuted saints sometimes live to tread upon the graves of their persecutors. Thus did the church's King weather the storm, and many a one has the church in like manner weathered. They are dead, to wit, Herod and his son Antipater, who, though there were mutual jealousies between them, yet, probably, concurred in seeking the destruction of this new King. If Herod first kill Antipater, and then die himself, the coasts are cleared, and the Lord is known by the judgments which he executes, when one wicked instrument is in the ruin of another. 2. He directs him what to do. He must go and return to the land of Israel; and he did so without delay; not pleading the tolerably good settlement he had in Egypt, or the inconveniences of the journey, especially if, as is supposed, it was in the beginning of winter that Herod died. God's people follow his direction whithersoever he leads them, wherever he lodges them. Did we but look upon the world as our Egypt, the place of our bondage and banishment, and heaven only as our Canaan, our home, our rest, we should as readily arise, and depart thither, when we are called for, as Joseph did out of Egypt.

III. The further direction he had from God, which way to steer, and where to fix in the land of Israel, Mat 2:22, Mat 2:23. God could have given him these instructions with the former, but God reveals his mind to his people by degrees, to keep them still waiting on him, and expecting to hear further from him. These orders Joseph received in a dream, probably, as those before, by the ministration of an angel. God could have signified his will to Joseph by the Child Jesus, but we do not find that in those removes he either takes notice, or gives notice, of any thing that occurred; surely it was because in all things it behoved him to be made like his brethren; being a Child, he spake as a child, and did as a child, and drew a veil over his infinite knowledge and power; as a child he increased in wisdom.

Now the direction given this holy, royal family, is, 1. That it might not settle in Judea, Mat 2:22. Joseph might think that Jesus, being born in Bethlehem, must be brought up there; yet he is prudently afraid for the young Child, because he hears that Archelaus reigns in Herod's stead, not over all the kingdom as his father did, but only over Judea, the other provinces being put into other hands. See what a succession of enemies there is to fight against Christ and his church! If one drop off, another presently appears, to keep up the old enmity. But for this reason Joseph must not take the young Child into Judea. Note, God will not thrust his children into the mouth of danger, but when it is for his own glory and their trial; for precious in the sight of the Lord are the life and the death of his saints; precious is their blood to him.

2. That it must settle in Galilee, Mat 2:22. There Philip now ruled, who was a mild, quiet, man. Note, The providence of God commonly so orders it, that his people shall not want a quiet retreat from the storm and from the tempest; when one climate becomes hot and scorching, another shall be kept more cool and temperate. Galilee lay far north; Samaria lay between it and Judea; thither they were sent, to Nazareth, a city upon a hill, in the centre of the lot of Zebulun; there the mother of our Lord lived, when she conceived that holy thing; and, probably, Joseph lived there too, Luk 1:26, Luk 1:27. Thither they were sent, and there they were well known, and were among their relations; the most proper place for them to be in. There they continued, and from thence our Saviour was called Jesus of Nazareth, which was to the Jews a stumbling-block, for, Can any good thing come out of Nazareth?

In this is said to be fulfilled what was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene. Which may be looked upon, (1.) As a man of honour and dignity, though primarily it signifies no more than a man of Nazareth; there is an allusion or mystery in speaking it, speaking Christ to be, [1.] The Man, the Branch, spoken of, Isa 11:1. The word there is Netzar, which signifies either a branch, or the city of Nazareth; in being denominated from that city, he is declared to be that Branch. [2.] It speaks him to be the great Nazarite; of whom the legal Nazarites were a type and figure (especially Samson, Jdg 13:5), and Joseph, who is called a Nazarite among his brethren (Gen 49:26), and to whom that which was prescribed concerning the Nazarites, has reference, Num 6:2, etc. Not that Christ was, strictly, a Nazarite, for he drank wine, and touched dead bodies; but he was eminently so, both as he was singularly holy, and as he was by a solemn designation and dedication set apart to the honour of God in the work of our redemption, as Samson was to save Israel. And it is a name we have all reason to rejoice in, and to know him by. Or, (2.) As a name of reproach and contempt. To be called a Nazarene, was to be called a despicable man, a man from whom no good was to be expected, and to whom no respect was to be paid. The devil first fastened this name upon Christ, to render him mean, and prejudice people against him, and it stuck as a nickname to him and his followers. Now this was not particularly foretold by any one prophet, but, in general, it was spoken by the prophets, that he should be despised and rejected of men (Isa 53:2, Isa 53:3), a Worm, and no man (Psa 22:6, Psa 22:7), that he should be an Alien to his brethren Psa 69:7, Psa 69:8. Let no name of reproach for religion's sake seem hard to us, when our Master was himself called a Nazarene.

Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible (1708–1710) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Mat 2:19. When Herod was dead — His death, of which Josephus has given us a very affecting account, happened, according to some, within three or four months of his perpetrating the above-mentioned bloody act, and was a fearful instance of that vengeance which God, even in this world, sometimes takes on his enemies, and those of his people. He died eaten with worms, at the age of seventy-one, after a reign of forty years, having endured such excruciating, lingering, and loathsome diseases, as rendered him intolerable to himself and others also. And his innate cruelty being thus exasperated, he became more barbarous than ever, and just before his death caused Antipater, his son and the heir apparent of his kingdom, to be executed on some groundless suspicion. God, it seems, made him, in a remarkable manner, a terror to himself and to all round about him. Eusebius, the ancient ecclesiastical historian, thought his death so great an illustration of the gospel history, that he has inserted it at large in his work. An angel of the Lord appeareth in a dream to Joseph in Egypt —

Probably the same angel which had appeared to him before, and directed him to flee into Egypt, and abide there till he should bring him word again. That word is now brought him, and in obedience to it he returns with the child and his mother into the land of Israel. Let us, in like manner, remember, it is God’s part to direct, and ours to obey. Nor can we be out of the way of safety and comfort while we are in the way of duty, following his directions, and steering our course by the intimations of his pleasure. For, “the preservation of the holy child Jesus may be considered as a figure of God’s care over his Church and people, in their greatest dangers. He doth not often, as he easily could, strike their persecutors with immediate destruction, but he provides a hiding place for his children, and by methods not less effectual, though less pompous, preserves them from being swept away even when the enemy comes in like a flood. Egypt, that was once the seat of persecution and oppression to the Israel of God, is now a refuge to his Son: and thus all places will be to us what Divine Providence will be pleased to make them. When, like Joseph and Mary, we are cut off from the worship of his temple, and, perhaps, removed into a strange land, he can be a little sanctuary to us, and give us, in his gracious presence, a rich equivalent for all we have lost.” — Doddridge.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

CRITICAL NOTES

Mat_2:22. Archelaus.—Succeeded to Judæa, Samaria and Idumea, but Augustus refused him the title of king till it should be seen how he conducted himself, giving him only the title of Ethnarch. Above this, however, he never rose. The people, indeed, recognised him as his father’s successor; and so it is here said that he “reigned in the room of his father Herod.” But after ten years’ defiance of the Jewish law and cruel tyranny, the people lodged heavy complaints against him, and the Emperor banished him to Vienne in Gaul, reducing Judæa again to a Roman province. Then “the sceptre” clean “departed from Judah” (Brown). Galilee, where Antipas, brother of Archelaus, was ruling under the title of Tetrarch. He was a tyrant too, but not so savage as Archelaus (Morison).

Mat_2:23. Nazareth.—Said to signify “the Protectress” (Heb. natsar), a small town of central Galilee, on the edge of the plain of Esdraelon, beautifully situated on the side of a steep hill, within a sheltered valley. Nazarene.—The meaning of this passage was probably as clear to the contemporaries of St. Matthew as the other references to prophecy (Mat_2:15; Mat_2:17); for us it is involved in doubt.

1. Nazarene cannot = Nazarite: the word differs in form, and in no sense could Christ be called a Nazarite.

2. The quotation is probably not from a lost prophecy. One meaning of the word Nazorœus is an inhabitant of Nazareth, but the word either—

1. Recalls the Hebrew word netser a branch, a title by which the Messiah is designated, Isa_11:1; or:

2. Connects itself in thought with the Hebrew natsar, to save or protect, and so has reference to the name and work of Jesus; or:

3. Is a synonym for “contemptible” or “lowly,” from the despised position of Nazareth. The play upon words which 1 and 2 involve is quite characteristic of Hebrew phraseology. The sound of the original would be either—

1. He whom the prophet called the “Netser” dwells at “Netser” (see Smith’s Bib. Dict.); or:

2. He who is called “Notsri” (my protector) dwells at “Natsaret” (the protectress) (Carr).

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.—Mat_2:19-23

Settled obscurity.—The main idea of the last passage in comparison with the passage which preceded it was that of contrast. The main idea of the present passage in comparison with the last is that of continuation. Things are found to remain—things are meant to remain—notwithstanding some changes, very much as they were. What the infant Jesus was seen to become in the last story, He is seen to continue in this. We may see this exhibited:

1. In the circumstances of His return from Egypt.

2. In its immediate consequences.

3. In its final result.

I. In the circumstances of His return.—There is a clear correspondence between these—certain minor differences only excepted—and those of the previous flight. Take the differences first: Herod was alive on the former occasion. Not only is he now no longer alive, but the same is true also of all who had sought “the young Child’s life” (Mat_2:20). The word “flee,” also, was used on the former occasion; the word “go” only on this—probably because the occasion was not an urgent one as before. Also, probably, for the same reason, we read nothing now of going “by night.” But, these exceptions excepted, all else is very much as before. The same kind of messenger or “angel”; the same sphere of appearance, in a vision or “dream”; the same kind and style of injunction; the same gracious vouchsafing of reasons in support of it; and the same ready and implicit obedience thereto, are found here as before (Mat_2:19-21). In all respects the Child is to go back as it had previously come. With much care and clearness of injunction, there was nothing of the royal, in the first of these cases. There is neither less nor more, in either respect, in this last.

II. In the immediate consequences of this return.—

1. On their negative side.—The direct route from Egypt to “the land of Israel” (Mat_2:21), would bring Joseph and his charges first to the territory of “Judæa” (Mat_2:22). Possibly, also, there were other reasons which would bring Joseph there first. He might naturally think of going back first to the exact locality he had left. He was connected with it, as we know (Luk_2:4), by his ancestry. Also by the way in which the story of Jesus had been connected with it so far. He might even be thinking, for the same reasons, of making that place his abode. If such were his intentions, they seem to account exactly for what we read of him next, viz. that “when he heard that Archelaus did reign in Judæa in the room of his father Herod (Mat_2:22), he was afraid to go thither.” He was afraid to do, that is to say, (so it seems to mean), what he had thought of doing before. Anyway we find that he was checked in this way from taking a step which would have had (if taken) a certain kind of kingly appearance about it. Going back to “Bethlehem” with its many associations, might not have amounted to much in the then lowly estate of the house of David; but it might also have looked like a tacit assertion of the royalty of their rights. Even so much as this, therefore, at that time, was not to be done.

2. On their positive side.—When thus checked, Joseph, of course, would be in some doubt. If not “thither,” then “whither”? So he would ask. We know that he had connections in Galilee; as also that it was from Galilee, some time before, that he had come up to Bethlehem to be taxed (Luk_2:4). Also we know from other sources (Jos., Ant., XVII. viii. 1), that Galilee was not included in the jurisdiction of this son of Herod—a man already distinguished for his cruelty (ibid., ix. 3)—but in that of his brother Antipas. If these things led Joseph, of themselves (as seems not improbable) to think of going to Galilee, the idea was confirmed—or may have been altogether suggested—by a fourth communication from heaven. “Being warned of God in a dream, he withdrew into the parts of Galilee,” into that despised province, that is to say, that obscure locality, where he would be almost as much of an exile, and quite as far from anything kingly, as in Egypt itself. So directly did God thus order again, that Jesus should still be as He was.

III. The final result.—There is an air—

1. Of great deliberation in what we read about this. “He came and dwelt”—he took up his abode—he settled down—in that part of the world. He did so also—it is further noted—“in a city called Nazareth;” as though to bid us observe that he did so, notwithstanding its name; notwithstanding the well-known ill repute of its name (cf. Joh_1:46). For all this the Evangelist would have us observe that this was the place which he “chose”—so far, but so far only, like him we read of in Gen_13:11. There is an air—

2. Of even greater deliberation in what accompanies this. To “dwell” in such a city—to be brought up in such a city—would either mean no distinction at all, or else distinction of a most unenviable description. Yet this, we are reminded, is just what God Himself had planned of old about the Messiah. The prophets had foretold in many places that He was to bear a name of special reproach. It was the fulfilment of such passages that God had in view in the choice of this place. He meant Jesus of Bethlehem not to be known as such, but as “Jesus of Nazareth” among men. He meant David’s Son—for a time at any rate—to be lost in the crowd. He meant to continue, in a word, what He had begun to indicate, when He bade Joseph take that infant King, and “flee” for His life!

From the passage thus considered we see:

1. How deliberate sometimes are God’s ways.—As with Moses who was forty years in the wilderness (Act_7:30) before being sent to effect the deliverance of Israel; as with John the Baptist (Luk_1:80), so with that Greater than either whom we are told about here. He is purposely sent into, and left in obscurity for nearly thirty years of His life—nearly a “generation” in fact (Luk_3:23). The sudden blaze of Luk_2:46-47, only makes this the more strange. How was it that One who could speak so well on that occasion was afterwards in silence so long?

2. How significant they are here.—When we see a lamp of great brilliancy lit and rejoiced in, and then immediately taken down and hid “under a bushel,” and afterwards kept there, though still unseen, with sedulous care, what do we expect if the master of the house is one who knows what he does? Evidently, that he has some great purpose in view! Most probably, also, that that purpose is of too profound a nature to be understood by us yet!

HOMILIES ON THE VERSES

Mat_2:19. Joseph.—

I. A pattern of self-abnegating submission.

II. An example of its rewards.—The angel ever comes again to those who have once obeyed and continue to wait.—A. Maclaren, D.D.

Mat_2:22. Joseph’s new fear.—

1. No wonder the children of wicked parents are suspected till their regeneration appear. Joseph fears lest Archelaus should be father-like or father-worse.

2. When God will comfort a man He removeth one doubt as well as another. Cf. chap. Mat_1:20. The Lord’s warrant and clear direction doth quiet the mind.—David Dickson.

Mat_2:23. The prophets mission.—The prophets are not primarily poets; poetry is not their professional office: they only happen by the way to be poetically gifted; they have another function to the purposes and uses of which they bend all their imaginative gifts.

I. They are intensely and supremely practical.—They have practical ends to serve, practical objects to achieve; they are statesmen directing, controlling the natural mind to political issues; they are furthering alliances, carrying out policies, making history.

II. They are preachers.—Aiming at the conscience rather than the imagination, claiming the will rather than the emotions.

III. They have an official commission to fulfil to which all their poetical capacities are directed—not merely exercising the gift of genius of singling out the truth implanted in them by God, that is the high mission of every poet; but a formal and certified commission to convey orders, to declare a Divine message, to promote a definite, deliberate counsel of God, to point forward to a certified and warranted goal of national history.—Canon Scott-Holland.

Prophecy.—What are the conditions and assumptions which are involved in prophecy?

I. It assumes one God, enduring, unchanging, supreme, who inhabiteth eternity.

II. The one God is holy.—He has a fixed spiritual character which constitutes His unity—a character which is consistent and true and rational, working by definite vital principles, a character of deliberate purpose, of certified aim, not wilfully wayward, not incalculably uncertain, but firm—loving for ever what He has once loved, and hating for ever what He has once hated.

III. He is a God who reveals Himself to man.—This revelation of Himself must be adapted to the measure of man’s capacity; it must be progressive, educational, disciplinary. The “I am” can but gradually reveal what it will be, and yet all that it will reveal itself to be will be only an unveiling of the eternal “I am.” And history is the medium of this unveiling.

IV. A specialised history.—God’s purpose is definite and real; it cannot remain vague, primeval, tentative, and diffused. It must disentangle itself, sharpen its outlines, shape its materials, push its way forward.

V. As the mind of God opens it points more and more to a fixed fulfilment.—Ibid.

Jesus at Nazareth.—Equally rich was the present life on which the eyes of the boy Jesus looked out. Across Esdraelon, opposite to Nazareth, there emerged from the Samarian hills the road from Jerusalem, thronged annually with pilgrims, and the road from Egypt with its merchants going up and down. The Midianite caravans could be watched for miles coming up from the fords of Jordan; and the caravans from Damascus wound round the foot of the hill on which Nazareth stands. Or if the village boys climbed the northern edge of their home, there was another road almost within sight, where the companies were still more brilliant—that direct highway between Acre and the Decapolis, along which legions marched, and princes swept with their retinues, and all sorts of travellers from all countries went to and fro. The Roman ranks, the Roman eagles, the wealth of noblemen’s litters and equipages cannot have been strange to the eyes of the boys of Nazareth, especially after their twelfth year, when they went up to Jerusalem, or with their fathers visited famous Rabbis, who came down from Jerusalem, peripatetic among the provinces. Nor can it have been the eye only which was stirred. For all the rumour of the Empire entered Palestine close to Nazareth—the news from Rome about the Emperor’s health, about the changing influence of the great statesmen, about the prospects at court of Herod, or of the Jews, about Cæsar’s last order concerning the tribute, or whether the policy of the procurator would be sustained. Many Galilæan families must have had relatives in Rome; Jews would come back to this countryside to tell of the life of the world’s capital. Moreover, the scandals of the Herods buzzed up and down these roads; pedlars carried them, and the peripatetic Rabbis would moralise upon them. And the customs, too, of the neighbouring Gentiles—their loose living, their sensuous worship, their absorption in business, the hopelessness of the inscriptions on their tombs, multitudes of which were readable (and some are still) on the roads round Galilee—all this would furnish endless talk in Nazareth, both among men and boys. Here, then, He grew up and suffered temptation, who was tempted in all points like as we are, yet without sin. The perfect example of His purity and patience was achieved—not easily as behind a wide fence which shut the world out—but amid rumour and scandal and every provocation to unlawful curiosity and premature ambition. A vision of all the kingdoms of the world was as possible from Nazareth as from the Mount of Temptation. The pressure and problems of the world outside God’s people must have been felt by the youth of Nazareth as by few others; yet the scenes of prophetic missions to it—Elijah’s and Elisha’s—were also within sight. But the chief lesson which Nazareth has for us is the possibility of a pure home and a spotless youth in the very face of the evil world.—Professor G. A. Smith in Expositor.

The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.

Mat 2:19-23.

Joseph Returns From Egypt, And Makes His Home At Nazareth

The angel appears again, as he had promised. (Mat 2:13.) The death of Herod (camp. on Mat 2:1) occurred in the spring (just before the Passover) of the year of Rome 750. Josephus mentions an eclipse of the moon ("Antiquities," 17, 6, 4) as taking place shortly before his death, and astronomical calculations enable us to fix the year with practical certainty. (Wieseler, Andrews, Caspari, Nicholson.) The birth of Jesus must have preceded Herod’s death by several months, if not longer, and must therefore have occurred at least four years before the common Christian era, the first year of which coincides with the year of Rome 754.[1] The poor old tyrant died of a most loathsome and torturing disease (see Josephus "Antiquities," 17, 6, 5), in the seventieth year of his life, and the thirty-seventh of his nominal, or thirty-fourth of his actual reign. (Josephus "War," 1, 33, 8; "Ant.," 17, 8, 1.)

[1] Upon this nearly all scholars are now agreed, from other data as well as the death of Herod, and some suppose there is an error of as much as five or six years. Our era was determined in the sixth century, and it is not strange that an error should have been committed. The mode in which we count time, Anno Domini, ’in the year of our Lord.’ cannot now be changed. We have simply to bear in mind that the birth of Christ actually occurred at least four years earlier than our era, and similarly as to his public ministry, and death. As he was, when he began his ministry, ’about thirty years of age’ (Luk 3:23), this would make A. D. 26, perhaps in the autumn; and if his ministry lasted as is probable for three and a half years, his death occurred A. D. 30. Most books of history and tables of chronology still fail to give these lares correctly probably from fear of confusing the popular mind. There can however be no danger of such confusion, if the simple facts, as just stated, receive the slightest attention.

Mat 2:20. Take the child and go, not now ’flee,’ as before (Mat 2:13). They are dead. The expression was probably suggested by Exo 4:19, ’For all are dead that sought thy life’ (Sept.), and so it takes a general form. There are none now that seek the child’s life—all such are dead. This might be said (the expression being borrowed) without specific reference to any death but that of Herod. (So Bengel, Bleek, Keil.) It is also possible to understand the plural as a mere general statement of a particular fact, such as is common in all languages, and without any reference to Exo 4:19. (Meyer). The idea (Euthym., Clark, Luketteroth) that Antipater is included, who was slain a few days before Herod’s death, assumes that he had shared his father’s hostility to the child, an assumption unsupported and improbable.—To seek the life of any one is a Hebrew idiom, Rom 11:3 Jer 44:30 Exo 4:19. The land of Israel was said partly, perhaps, in contrast to the heathen land in which they had been sojourning, but also as a designation of the whole country, the term ’Judea’ being presently applied (Mat 2:22) to a particular district. ’Land of Israel’ is not elsewhere found in the New Testament, but see ’cities of Israel’ in Mat 10:23. But when he heard. ’Notwithstanding,’ in Com. Ver., is quite too strong for the Greek connective. Judea, always in Matthew, Mark, and John, and sometimes in Luke and Acts, means the southern district, as distinguished from Galilee, Samaria, and Perea. Elsewhere in Luke and Acts, and always in the Epistles, it denotes the whole country. In Mat 2:22 the only fact of importance to Joseph is that Archelaus reigns over Judea, where he has intended to live; and we need not suppose that ’Judea’ here includes Samaria, which was also under Archelaus’ dominion.[1] After many changes of his will, Herod at the last moment divided his dominions among three of his sons (Josephus "Antiquities," 18, 8-11). (1) Herod Antipas was made Tetrarch of Galilee and Perea. (The Greek word ’tetrarch’ signified originally the ruler of the fourth part of a province or district, as in Galatia; but was applied by the Romans in the time of our Lord to the ruler of any considerable part of a province or people.) He is the Herod who appears in connection with John the Baptist and the public ministry of our Lord (Mat 14:1 if). (2) Herod Philip, Tetrarch of Iturea, Trachonitis, and some adjacent districts, is not mentioned in the Gospel history, except in Luk 3:1. It was another Herod Philip, one left in a private station, that married their niece Herodias, and was forsaken by her for Antipas; the daughter of this other Philip and Herodias was Salome, the dancer, who subsequently married Philip the Tetrarch. Among the ten wives and numerous children of Herod the Great, the same names frequently recur. Philip the Tetrarch is described by Josephus as a worthy man, and a just ruler; apparently the best man of the Herod family. Our Lord, towards the close of his ministry in Galilee, repeatedly retires from the dominions of the weak and cunning Antipas to those of Philip (Mat 14:13; Mat 15:29; Mat 16:13). (3) To Archelaus were given Judea (with Idumea) and Samaria, making at least one half of his father’s kingdom, and yielding twice as much revenue as both the tetrarchies combined (Josephus "Ant.," 17, 11, 4). Herod assigned him the title of ’king,’ and he was saluted as such after his father’s death, and so regarded in Judea for a considerable period (Jos."Ant.," 17, 8, and ch. 9, 1-5), though the Emperor Augustus finally allowed him only the title of ethnarch (ruler of a nation or people, a rather more honourable title than tetrarch), with the promise to declare him king if he should deserve it. The expression did reign, or was reigning, i. e., was king, is thus minutely correct for the period immediately following Herod’s death. It may, however, be understood as used loosely, just as ’king’ is applied to any ruler, from the Roman Emperor (1Pe 2:13) to Herod Antipas the Tetrarch (Mat 14:9; Mar 6:14). So Josephus ("Life ") says his own father was born "while Archelaus was reigning the tenth year."Joseph is surprised and disappointed at learning that Archelaus is appointed King of Judea, for it had been understood that Antipas was to succeed his father in the whole kingdom, and Herod made the change just before his death (Josephus "Antiquities," 17, 6, 1; 8, 1; 9, 4).

[1] The name’ Palestine’ means land of the Philistines, the form being a little changed in passing through the Greek. (In Com. Ver. of Old Testament, ’Palestina’ and ’Philistia.’) As the Philistines occupied the maritime plain, the Greeks and Romans, first visiting the towns near the coast, afterwards extended the name of the coast to the adjacent region inland, as they did in many other cases, and thus Palestine became a common name for the whole country, being so used sometimes even by Philo and Josephus. Though not found in New Testament, it has continued to rival the name Judea to the present day. The redoubtable Philistines still live in geography.

On warned and turned aside, or withdrew, see on "Mat 2:12". The parts of Galilee, those parts of the country which were comprised in that district (compare Mat 16:13; Act 20:2).

Mat 2:23. The town of Nazareth[1] is not mentioned in Old Testament, which is not surprising, as the Old Testament history rarely extends to any part of Galilee. Nor need we wonder that Josephus does not name it, as it was a small town remote from the principal roads, and did not fall in the way of any of the military operations which he describes. It was situated about fifty-five miles north of Jerusalem, in an elevated basin, such as is frequently found in Samaria and Galilee. This basin is about a mile long by less than half a mile wide, opening southward by a narrow and winding pass into the great plain of Esdraelon. Split a pear endwise and the lower half, with the crooked stem, will give the shape of the valley of Nazareth. The encompassing slope is divided by depressions on its face into some seventeen distinct hills. On the western side of this elevated valley, and sloping a little way up the western hill, lies the modern town, and there is no reason to think the site has materially changed. Higher up the slope is a limestone cliff thirty or forty feet high, which (or one of the similar ones not far from it) may well have been the "brow of the hill whereon their city was built, " from which the mob proposed to cast their rejected prophet, (Luk 4:29) a scene absurdly located by monkish tradition at a precipice two miles away, overlooking the plain of Esdraelon. The vale of Nazareth is green and very fertile, with many fruit trees and a fine fountain near the village, altogether presenting a beautiful scene; and from the high western hill is a view among the most extensive in Palestine, embracing Tabor and the great plain, Carmel and the blue Mediterranean, the mountain-wall east of the depressed Jordan valley, and on the north the far-off snowy summit of Hermon. Yet, as so often happens, the dwellers amid all these beauties of nature were rude, violent, and of evil repute. The question of Nathanael: (Joh 1:46, Rev. Ver.)"Can there anything good come out of Nazareth?" is not sufficiently accounted for, as some have thought, by the contempt for Galilee in general which was felt by the people of Judea; for Nathanael himself lived at "Cana of Galilee " (Joh 21:2), only a few miles distant. Nor can it be easily regarded as an unjust prejudice, for Nathanael was a man of singularly good character. (Joh 1:47) And so the unparalleled violence of the rabble, (Luk 4:28-30) and the persistent unbelief even on a second visit which excited the wonder of Jesus himself, (Mar 6:6) are not fully explained by the fact that he was a prophet "in his own country, " but lead us to think of them as an intractable and disorderly people, deserving their bad reputation. But here lived the righteous Joseph, and the meek, devout Mary; and here "increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man ", (Luk 2:52) the child, the boy, the youth, the man, who was in due time to come forth from this obscure village as the consolation of Israel, as the Saviour of the world. Here he wrought (Mar 6:3) at the humble and laborious calling of his reputed father (see on "Mat 13:55"); here he worshipped every Sabbath, with such worship as only the perfect could pay, in the synagogue from which he was afterwards to be rudely thrust forth; and often, no doubt, he would climb this western hill as the sun was sinking in the Mediterranean, and look down with pure pleasure upon the beautiful valley, or far away over the magnificent prospect, and, as his human mind gradually unfolded to comprehend his mission, would think great thoughts of the kingdom that should fill the whole earth and should have no end. (See copious and pleasing descriptions in Renan and Geikie).

[1] The original Aramaic form of the name was probably Nazara (see Keim).

That he should be called, is as natural a translation of the Greek as He shall be called, and better suits the most probable interpretation of this passage. The words, ’He shall be called a Nazarene,’ are not found in the Old Testament. The difficulty thus presented has been variously explained. (1) Chrys., Hanna, and some others, suppose a lost prophecy. But this is a mere make-shift. The term ’the prophets’ in New Testament, everywhere means the canonical prophets. (Meyer.) Ewald’s suggestion that it may be from an apocryphal book, is likewise a makeshift. (2) Jerome, Calvin, and others, connect it with the law as to the Nazirites. But Nazareth and Nazarene are almost certainly not derived from nazir, ’consecrated,’ but from netzer, ’branch,’ ’shoot,’ as shown by the Syriac and the Rabbinical forms of the word Nazarene (Robinson, Evang. and Mishna) or else from some kindred word formed on the same root. (Grimm.)[1] Moreover, Jesus was in no sense a Nazirite, being quite different, as he himself declares (Mat 11:18-19), from John the Baptist. Observe that Rev. Ver. in Num 6:2 Jdg 13:5, etc., spells not Nazarite, but Nazirite, according to the Hebrew nazir. (3) Fritzsche, Meyer, Bleek, Weiss, Edersh., and others, suppose a reference to Isa 11:1, where Messiah is called a ’branch,’ Hebrew netzer. An equivalent though different Hebrew word is applied to him in Jer 23:5, Jer 33:15; Zec 3:8; Zec 6:12. From the passage in Isaiah, reinforced by the others, it may have become common (Bleek supposes) to call the Messiah simply netzer, ’branch,’ as is perhaps implied in Zec 3:8. So the prediction of the ’prophets’ led to Messiah’s being ’called’ Netzer, and as a resident at Netzer or Natzara, Jesus was called Nazarene. This is ingenious and may be true, though it seems far-fetched. (4) Olshausen, Lange, Westcott (Int.), and others, understand it as referring to the various predictions (e. g., Psalms 22, Isaiah 53), that Messiah would be despised and reviled, as was done when he was ’called’ a Nazarene. Had he been called Jesus the Bethlehemite, it would have seemed honourable; but to be called Jesus the Nazarene, would at once awaken the contempt of the Jews, and would be a prima facie argument against his claims’ to be regarded a Messiah, the son of David; and we know that such an argument was once actually used. (Joh 7:41)[2] As thus understood, the passage is best translated as in Rev. Ver. This seems, upon the whole, to be decidedly the best view. The Mohammedans in Palestine, now commonly call Christians Nazarenes. (Thomson, II., 316.) (5) Hengstenberg, Alexander, Ellicott, Keil, combine (3) and (4), understanding Isaiah ll: 1 to represent Messiah as "a shoot from the prostrate trunk or stem of Jesse, i. e., as from the royal family of Judah in its humble and reduced estate." (Alex.): But this mode of connecting the two theories appears artificial. It is better to be content with one or the other, as either of them is quite possibly correct. (6) Lutteroth has a new explanation: Joseph saw that a life in Bethlehem would be perilous for the child, and in order that be might live, and the prophecies concerning him as Messiah might be fulfilled, Joseph took him to dwell in Nazareth, ’because he would be called a Nazarene,’ and not a Bethlehemite, and thus would be less likely to incur hostility than if known to be from the city of David. This is quite ingenious, but strained and improbable. The translation, "because he would be called," is possible.

[1] McClellan begs the question, and actually translates, ’He shall be called a Nazarite.’

[2] It has been remarked that Plutarch frequently quotes Plato as saying something which cannot be found in Plato’s works in so many words, but is substantially contained in various passages. Indeed the same thing is done by many writers, and is perfectly natural.

The plural, by, through, the prophets, is favourable to (4). Yet in (3) it is possible to suppose reference also to the other prophets, (besides Isa 11:1) in which another but equivalent Hebrew word is employed. And the plural might be used with especial reference to a single prediction, as in Joh 6:45 Act 13:40 Act 15:15, though this is unusual, and never found in Matthew. (Compare Mat 26:56.) That it might be fulfilled, as in Mat 1:22, the providential purpose.

On comparing the two first chapters of Matthew and of Luke, there appears to be some conflict as to the order of events. Not in the fact that Matthew makes no mention of the previous residence at Nazareth, which was simply not necessary to his own chief object of showing that Jesus was the Messiah. But Luke (Luk 2:39), makes the return to Nazareth follow the presentation in the temple, thus apparently leaving no room for the visit of the Magi and the flight into Egypt. The presentation, it is true, might possibly have followed the visit of the Magi—the distance being only five miles—before Herod concluded that the Magi had mocked him. But this ill accords with the expressions of Mat 2:13-14, and the gifts of the Magi would, if previously received, have enabled the parents to present the regular offerings, without being restricted to those permitted to the poor. (Luk 2:24; Lev 12:8.) Moreover, Luke would still seem to exclude the flight into Egypt. To meet this difficulty, some suppose that immediately after the presentation they returned to Nazareth (Luke), and having there made the necessary arrangements, removed to Bethlehem, intending to rear the child in the city of David, an intention still apparently retained by them on returning from Egypt. (Mat 2:22.) But though tenable (adopted in Clark’s Harmony), this supposition is less simple and natural than to understand that Luke, omitting all intermediate events, passes at once from the presentation in the temple to that return to Nazareth which Matthew also records. And if Luke seems to leave no room for any intervening occurrences, this arises from the necessity of the case in a brief narrative which, being compelled to omit much, must bring together events not immediately successive, and must do this without leaving a break at the point of omission, or else altogether destroy its own continuity, and become not a narrative but a mass of fragments. If Providence designed, that there should be four independent Gospels, and each was to be a simple and readable story, apparent disagreements of this sort are inevitable. It follows that such cases cannot with propriety be understood as involving any real conflict. And we see that it is becoming to eschew the nervous harmonizing practised by some, as well as the disposition of others to magnify discrepancies, and eagerly pronounce them irreconcilable.

Homiletical And Practical

Mat 2:13. God had promised that this child should save others (Mat 1:21), yet now he must flee for his own life. So Paul at the shipwreck. (Act 27:22, Act 27:31) The supernatural comes in only where natural powers would not suffice. The child is not preserved from Herod’s designs by miracle, nor miraculously transported into Egypt, after the fashion of the legendary miracles, but there is simply a supernatural warning that he must be carried away. The revelation is not all given at once. Bengel: "Joseph must quietly wait an uncertain time, ’till I bring thee word.’ " Jer. Taylor." And so for all his sons by adoption, God will determine the time, and ease our pains and refresh our sorrows, and give quietness to our fears and deliverance from our troubles, and sanctify it all and give a crown at last, and all in his good time, if we but wait the coming of the angel, and in the meantime do our duty with care, and sustain our temporals with indifferency."

Mat 2:14. Henry: "Those that would make sure work of their obedience, must make quick work of it."

Mat 2:15. Israel and Messiah, both so, journeying in Egypt—occasion in each case, and result.

Mat 2:16. Cruelty. (1) Fostered by the possession of despotic power. (2) Inflamed by fancied insult. (3) Recklessly smiting the innocent. (4) Blindly missing its object.

Mat 2:17-18. The old, old story—the dead babe and the heart-stricken mother. ’And would not be comforted.’ When we are willing to be comforted, divine comfort is not far away.

Luther represents the Magi in their own country as the first New Testament preachers, and the murdered innocents as the first martyrs.

Mat 2:19 (and Mat 2:13). If we wait and watch for the guidance which God has promised, it will come, and at the right time.

Mat 2:20. He that ’fled’ in alarm (Mat 2:18) now ’goes’ in safety. Alas! for the human being whose death brings a feeling of relief to the innocent and the good.

Mat 2:22. Like father, like son.

Mat 2:23. The truest greatness usually grows up in retirement, often in obscurity; and the greatest personage in history was not an exception to this rule. In our day of hot haste, and especially of youthful impatience robe at work, it is well to remember that he who knew his ministry could last but a few years, spent thirty years in the most quiet preparation.

The Youth Of Jesus

As to the Saviour’s life, from the point now reached to-his baptism (Mat 3:13), we have no information in Matthew, and none in the other Gospels, save the interesting and instructive incident of Luk 2:41-52. There we find him at the age of twelve, highly intelligent and trusted by his parents; devoted to the study of the Scriptures, showing a wonderful acquaintance with them (compare Josephus, "Life 2"), and asking questions in the eager desire to know more; beginning to perceive that God is in some peculiar sense his ’Father,’ and fond of attendance at his ’Father’s house’; shrinking already from the sensation he produces, retiring into obscurity and subject to his parents; and growing in wisdom as he grows in stature (or age). It is a bright and inspiring glimpse, and perfectly harmonious with his character and life as a public teacher.

To meet the curiosity always felt as to his childhood and youth, a variety of marvellous stories were invented during the early centuries, which were recorded in apocryphal Gospels or passed into tradition. Though many of these are sanctioned by the Romish Church, they are often absurd, and sometimes blasphemous; and the recital of them would be to no profit, unless it were in the way of illustrating by contrast the simplicity, the reserve, the perfect good taste, of the inspired narrative.

The external conditions under which Jesus grew up, are known to us from general sources of information. His development must have been influenced by such outward circumstances as the following: (1) Home. (2) Nature (see as to Nazareth, on "Mat 2:23"). His deep love of nature appears repeatedly in his public ministry. (3) The Scriptures. (4) The synagogue. (5) Labour; he was a worker in wood, (Mar 6:3) and it is stated in a very early tradition that he made "ploughs and yokes " (Justin Martyr, "Trypho," 88). It is not improbable that after Joseph’s death (compare below), the growing youth’s labour aided in the support of that loved mother for whom he took pains to provide when he was about to die (Joh 19:26-27) That he spent much time in reflection, and in prayerful communion with his Father, is naturally inferred from his course at a later period. (On this paragraph, compare Keim and Edersheim).

Among the outward events of these twenty-eight or twenty-nine years, a few at least ought to be here recalled.

When Jesus was about ten years old, A. D. 6, such serious complaints against Arehelaus were made at Rome, that he was deposed from the ethnarchate of Judea and Samaria, and banished to Vienna, in Gaul. (Josephus "Antiquities," 17,13, 2.) At that time the earlier history of Archelaus (see on "Mat 2:22") would be much talked about, and thus becoming familiar to Jesus, might have afterwards suggested the Parable of the Founds. (Luk 19:12 ff) For there is a striking resemblance in many leading points: (1) Archelaus went away to Rome to receive royal power, and return to exercise it, and left his supporters in charge of his affairs. (2) The Jews hated him, and sent an embassy of fifty persons to Rome to say that they did not want Archelaus as their king. ("Ant." 17, 11, lf.) (3) When Arehelaus returned, though Augustus had enjoined moderation, he punished with great severity. (17, 13, 2.) After the banishment of Archelaus, his dominions were made a Roman province. Many of the Jews had desired this at the death of Herod, and now entreated that it be done, being weary of their weak native rulers, and expecting greater quiet and better protection for property and business under a Roman governor. Exactly similar changes, and for similar reasons, now often occur in British India, and under the Russian rule in Central Asia, and were then taking place in other parts of the Roman Empire (e. g., Tac. "Ann.," II. 42). But other Jews violently opposed such a change, clinging to the bare shadow of independence, and accounting it a sin that the people of God should be directly subject to heathen rulers, especially that they should pay them taxes. A portion of these broke out into rebellion under Judas, the Galilean or Gaulonite. (Josephus "Antiquities," 18, 1; Act 5:37.) This movement, and other similar insurrections in following years, were easily quelled by the Romans, but the sentiment which produced them remained. (Compare a section of the German Anabaptists, the Fifth Monarchy men in England, etc.) From it came the question, "Is it lawful to give tribute to Cesar?" (Mat 22:17.) Some of its supporters were subsequently associated as Cananites or Zelotae, including Simon, who became one of the twelve apostles. (Mat 10:4.) Degenerating by degrees into mere robbers, the men of this opinion still commanded popular sympathy, as was perhaps shown in the case of Barabbas. (Mat 27:16.) The same smouldering sentiment broke out in A. D. 66, leading (Josephus "Ant.," 18, 1, 6) to the war which ended in the destruction of Jerusalem, and in which the Zealots took a prominent part. The Roman Governors of Judea and Samaria were called procurators, the sixth of whom, Pontius Pilatus (Mat 27:2), ruled from A. D. 26 (when the ministry of John and of Jesus probably began), to A. D. 86. Meantime, the quiet dwellers at Nazareth were not directly concerned in these changes and commotions, remaining under the rule of Herod Antipas (see on "Mat 2:22"), which continued to A. D. 39.

The youthful carpenter was probably in his nineteenth year (A. D. 14) when the great Emperor Augustus died, and was succeeded by Tiberius, who reigned throughout the remaining life of Jesus, and for some seven years longer (A. D. 37).

It seems nearly certain that Joseph died at some time between the visit to Jerusalem of Luk 2:41 (probably A. D. 8), and the baptism of Christ (probably A. D. 26). Not only is he never mentioned in the history of our Lord’s public ministry, but Mary is spoken of in such ways as seem to imply that she was then a widow. That several sons and daughters were born to Joseph and Mary is probable, but not certain. (Compare on Mat 1:25, and Mat 13:55.)

A very full account of whatever will throw light on this period in the life of Christ, including the home life and school life of a Jewish child, the social influences, public worship, and religious sentiments of the time, the political changes, and the growing and shifting expectations of the Messiah, may be found in Geikie, ch. xii-xxiii, and Edersheim, ch. ix, x. See also Ewald, Keim, Hausrath, Edersheim’s "Sketches of Jewish Social Life," and other writers.

John A. Broadus, Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (American Baptist Publication Society, 1886) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

2:19 After Herod the Great died in 4 BC, Caesar split up his kingdom. Herod’s son Archelaus (2:22) was appointed over Judea, Samaria, and Idumea, while Antipas (14:1-12; Luke 13:31-32) was appointed over Galilee and Perea.

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Mat 2:19-21 . Joseph’s return . Τελευτήσαντος δὲ τ . Ἡρ : Herod died in 750 U. C. in his 70th year, at Jericho, of a horrible loathsome disease, rotten in body as in soul, altogether an unwholesome man ( vide Joseph, Bell, i. 33, 1 5; Antiq., xvii. 6, 5; Euseb., H. E., i. 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 at an end. 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 again needed, desired, and obtained. ἰδοὺ ἄγγελος … λέγων : the guidance is given once more in a dream ( κατʼ ὄναρ ). The anxious thoughts of the daytime are reflected in the dream by night, and the angelic message comes to put an end to uncertainty.

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Christ is brought up in Nazareth, after the death of the tyrant by God’s providence: that by the very name of the place, it might plainly appear to the world, that he is the Lord’s true Nazarite.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

But when Herod was dead--Miserable Herod! Thou thoughtest thyself safe from a dreaded Rival; but it was He only that was safe from thee; and thou hast not long enjoyed even this fancied security. See on Mat 2:15.

behold, an angel of the Lord appeareth in a dream to Joseph in Egypt--Our translators, somewhat capriciously, render the same expression "the angel of the Lord," Mat 1:20; Mat 2:13; and "an angel of the Lord," as here. As the same angel appears to have been employed on all these high occasions--and most likely he to whom in Luke is given the name of "Gabriel," Luk 1:19, Luk 1:26 --perhaps it should in every instance except the first, be rendered "the angel."

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

But when Herod was dead,.... Who died, as before observed, a few months after this tragedy was acted; and, according to the (w) Jewish writers, on the seventh day of the month Cisleu, and which answers to the twenty fifth of our November: and was afterwards observed as a day of rejoicing by the Jews. The account which Josephus (x), and from him Eusebius (y), gives of his miserable death, is as follows; a burning fever seized him, with an intolerable itching all over his body, and continual pains of the colic; his feet swelled with a dropsy; he had an inflammation in the lower part of his belly: a putrefaction in his privy parts, which bred worms; a frequency and difficulty of breathing, and convulsions in all his members; he had a voracious appetite, a stinking breath, and his intestines abounded with ulcers; when he found that all means made use of were ineffectual, and that he must die, he attempted to lay violent hands upon himself, but was prevented, and soon after expired in a very miserable manner. Now some time after his death,

behold an angel of the Lord appeareth in a dream to Joseph in Egypt. It may be the same angel who appeared in the same manner, and ordered him to go into Egypt, with the young child and his mother; and who now brings him news of the death of Herod, and bids him return to the land of Israel; which shows the watchful providence of God, and the useful ministry of angels, concerned in the preservation of the infant Jesus.

(w) Megillah Taanith apud Van Till. de anno, &c. Christ. Nat. p. 122. (x) De Bello Judaic. l. 1. c. 33. sect. 5. 7. & Antiq. l. 17. c. 9. (y) Eccl. Hist. l. 1. c. 8. p. 25, 26.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

19 But when Herod was dead, behold, an angel of the Lord appeareth in a dream to Joseph in Egypt,

Ver. 19. But when Herod was dead] Not long after this butchery at Bethlehem he fell into a foul and loathsome disease, whereof he died: {a} so did Sulla, that bloody man before him; {b} so did Maximinus, and others after him. John de Roma, a cruel monk and inquisitioner (who used to fill boots with boiling grease, and so putting them upon the legs of those whom he examined, to tie them backward to a form, with their legs hanging down over a small fire, &c.), was smitten by God with an incurable disease, so loathsome that none could come near him, so swarming with vermin and so rotten, that the flesh fell away from the bones by piece meal, &c. Twiford (who was executioner of Frith, Bayfield, Bainham, Lambert, and other good men) died rotting above ground, that none could abide him. (Acts and Mon.) So did Alexander the cruel keeper of Newgate, and John Peter his son-in-law, who commonly, when he would affirm anything, used to say, If it be not true, I pray God I rot ere I die. Stephen Gardner rejoicing upon the news of the bishops burnt at Oxford, was suddenly seized by the terrible hand of God as he sat dining; continuing for the space of fifteen days in such intolerable torment, that he could not have any bowel movements, or otherwise, anything that he received; whereby his body being miserably inflamed (who had inflamed so many good martyrs before) was brought to a wretched end; his tongue hanging out all black and swollen, as Archbishop Arundel’s did before him. (Acts and Mon.) But to return to Herod; when he saw he should die indeed, that there might be no mourning at his funeral, he commanded the Jewish nobility (whom he had imprisoned for that purpose in the Castle of Hippodromus) to be all slain as soon as ever he was dead. (Josephus.) And being at the point of death, he commanded his son Antipater to be executed in the prison, whom but a little while before he had declared heir of the kingdom. In November, 1572, appeared a new star in Cassiopeia, and continued sixteen months. Theodore Beza wittily applied it (saith Mr Camden, Elizabeth) to that star at Christ’s birth, and to the infanticide there, and warned Charles IX to beware in this verse,

" Tu vero, Herodes sanguinolente, time."

"And thou blood heard, truly fear"

The fifth month after the vanishing of this star, the said Charles, after long and grievous pains, died of exceeding bleeding. Constans fama est illum, dum e variis corporis partibus sanguis emanaret, in lecto scepe volutatum, inter horribilium blasphemiarum diras, tantam sanguinis vim proiecisse, ut paucas post horas mortuus fuerit: persecutors (as they say of the devil) go out with a stench. Arius (saith one) voiding out his guts, sent his soul, as a harbinger to hell, to provide room for his body: he was brought to confusion by the prayers of Alexander, the good Bishop of Constantinople, and his death was precationis opus, non morbi, work of pray not of death. (Socrat.) So, likely, was Herod’s.

Behold, an angel] Glad of an office to serve the saints, Heb 1:14. They rejoice more in their names of office than of honour: to be called angels, watchmen, {Dan 4:23} &c., than principalities; powers, &c. It was long ere Joseph heard from heaven, but God’s time he knew was the best. And although he leave his people, to their thinking, yet he forsakes not. No, that he doth not, saith the author to the Hebrews. ουδ ου μη σε εγκαταλιπω. Heb 13:5.

{a} Lento calore torrebatur. Ipsa quoque verenda putrefacta scatebant vermiculis. Joseph.

{b} Sulla saevus ita ut φονων ουτ αριθμος ουθ ορος esset, Plutarch. In rustico praedio pediculari morbo periit, η τε προτερον ευτυχια δοκουσα τοιουτο περιηλθεν αυτψ τελος.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Herod was dead - See the notes at Mat 2:15. Herod left three sons, and the kingdom was at his death divided between them. To Archelaus was given Judea, Idumea, and Samaria; to Philip, Batanea and Trachonitis; to Antipas, Galilee and Perea.

Each of these was also called Herod, and these are the individuals who are so frequently referred to in the New Testament during the ministry. of the Saviour and the labors of the apostles. The above table will show at a glance the chief connections of this family, as far as they are mentioned in the sacred history.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

That is, as some say, within three or four months, for Herod, they say, no longer outlived this bloody act; and if we may believe historians, he was in his death made a dreadful example of Divine vengeance. But we cannot assert the just time how long he outlived this bloody act; when he was dead, God, who had promised Joseph, Mat 2:13, to tell him by an angel, (as before), let Joseph know he might safely return. It is probable this apparition was not immediately upon the death of Herod, for Archelaus was reigning, who must be allowed some time to go to Rome, and to have this dignity conferred on him; but soon after he was dead this apparition was, with a command to him to return into the land of Israel, to which he soon yieldeth obedience.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Vers. 19-23. The return from Egypt and settlement in Nazareth.

But when Herod was dead. Does the repetition of the tenor of ver. 15 point to a different source? Behold, an angel (rightly; contrast Mat_1:20, note) of the Lord appeareth in a dream to Joseph. (fainetai kat onar , as in ver. 13) In both cases the stress is on the fact of the appearance, not on its mode. In Egypt. The evangelist will leave no room for doubt as to where Joseph then was (cf. note at head of chapter).

Vers. 19-23. Providence in prophecy and history.

Matthew, perhaps more constantly than any other New Testament writer, notes fulfilment of prophecy in events of history. His Gospel, which was the first written, was primarily intended for the Jews, who were familiar with this class of evidence, and would naturally look for it. The evidence is intrinsically very important, amongst other things evincing a Providence all-wise and all-powerful.

I THAT CANNOT BE A CHANCE WHICH IS CIRCUMSTANTIALLY ACCURATELY FORETOLD.

1. Vague utterances are outside this argument. Such are those which may be interpreted either way. Such were those of the heathen oracles. Such are not those of Scripture prophecy.

2. Guesses also are out of the question.

(1) These may occasionally come true, viz. when they concern things of usual occurrence.

(2) That they should constantly come true is incredible. The ratio of probabilities is mathematically determinable.

(3) That guesses should constantly come true when hazarded in relation to things extraordinary and supernatural is next thing to impossible. But the subjects of Scripture prophecy are these very things.

II THE PROPHECIES OF SCRIPTURE, WHILE THEY CONCERN THINGS UNIQUE, ARE MINUTELY CIRCUMSTANTIAL.

1. Those concerning Messiah answer this description.

(1) Never before his appearance was there any person to compare with him. Never since. He was unique in all points.

(2) Yet was he very fully described in prophecy. As the stream of time flowed on since the first utterance, (Gen_3:15) feature became added to feature by successive seers, until the collective testimony presents a proto-biography wonderfully complete.

2. Witness the sample respecting his infancy here given.

(1) His incarnation by a virgin mother of the family of David. (cf. Mat_1:22-24 with Isa_7:13, Isa_7:14)

(2) The occurrence of this stupendous event in the town of Bethlehem of Judah. (cf. vers. 5, 6 with Mic_5:2)

(3) The appearance of a star by which the Magi were guided in accordance with Balaam"s parable. (see Num_24:15-19)

(4) The slaughter of the innocents. (cf. vers. 16-18 with Jer_31:15-17)

(5) The deliverance of Jesus from that slaughter, which prophecy required, as he had to fulfil many predictions there written. (see Luk_24:44-48)

(6) The flight into Egypt. (cf. vers. 13-15, 19-21, with Exo_4:22, 23 Hos_11:1)

(7) The residence in Nazareth of Galilee, in connection with which he came to be called a Nazarene. Wonderful, is the credulity of that unbelief which can see nothing in such a tissue of evidence.

3. But where in prophecy is he described as a Nazarene?

(1) We may find this in the law of the Nazarite taken as a prophecy.

(2) Therefore also in those Nazarites, such as Samson, who must be viewed as typical persons. (see Jud 13:5-7 16:17) Note: Jesus was in spirit, not in the letter, a Nazarite. (see Mat_11:18, Mat_11:19)

(3) We may also find it in those prophecies which set forth the humiliation and odium to which Messiah was to be subjected. For the name "Nazarene" became a term of reproach. (cf. Joh_1:14; see also Psa_22:6 Psa_69:6-10 Isa_53:3, Isa_53:12)

(4) If "Nazarene" be derived from rzn, this word signifies not only to separate," but also to crown. " When Pilate in scorn set over Jesus the inscription, "Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews," Jesus was then in derision also crowned, viz. with thorns. God makes the very derision of his enemies to praise him.

III THINGS NOT FORETOLD ARE YET FOREKNOWN.

1. The knowledge of things foretold implies a foreknowledge also of things to be historically interwoven with them.

(1) Thus a foreknowledge of the slaughter of the innocents implies a foreknowledge also of Herod, his character, and resources.

(2) The time of Herod"s death also must have been foreknown, since the return of Jesus from Egypt, a thing foretold, was historically made contingent upon it.

(3) The succession of Archelaus to the throne of Herod must likewise have been foreknown, for the retirement of Jesus into Nazareth of Galilee, a thing foretold, was historically made contingent upon this. Archelaus, as Ethnarch (by courtesy called King) of Judaea, would be likely to inherit his father"s jealousy and caution, as he was well known to have inherited his cruelty and tyranny (see Josephus, "Ant.," 17. c. 10).

2. Thus the foreknowledge of things interwoven with things.foretold implies a corresponding foreknowledge of things interwoven with these.

(1) This follows by the same rule. So in turn of things interwoven with these. Thus a perfect knowledge of anything must involve a perfect knowledge of everything.

(2) Such, therefore, is the intelligence of Divine providence as witnessed in the evidence of prophecy. Such intelligence may be implicitly trusted for guidance. Such guidance should be earnestly sought.

IV THERE IS A PROVIDENCE OF HISTORY AS WELL AS OF PROPHECY.

1. God is not simply an Omniscient Spectator.

a. He was more than a Spectator when he inspired his prophets.

b. He is also a Worker in history.

2. Instances of his direct interference with the factors of history are here recorded. He interfered:

a. To prevent the Magi from returning to Herod.

b. To prompt Joseph to fly into Egypt.

c. To direct the return of the holy family from Egypt.

d. To instruct their retirement into Galilee.

e. To provide, viz. in the gifts of the Magi, for their subsistence.

3. This intervention was necessary to the fulfilment of prophecy.

(1) The same Being who inspired the predictions wrought in their accomplishment. He let none of the words of his prophets fall to the ground. (cf. 1Sa_3:19 1Sa_9:6)

(2) If prophecy reveals the providence of knowledge, history no less truly reveals the providence of power.

V THE PROVIDENCE OF HISTORY, LIKE THAT OF PROPHECY, IS ALL-COMPRISING.

1. Since God works in events necessary to the fulfilment of prophecy, he must work in all events.

(1) For what events are there that are not tending to the fulfilment of prophecy? The subjects of prophecy are race-wide in their range, and extend along the whole course of time.

(2) The central line of events, more prominently delineated in prophecy, are historically interwoven with other events, these with others, and so forth. So if the interference of a providential Worker is required in respect to the central line, his working will be required from the centre outwards to the very bounds of action. Hence:

2. There is a supernatural energy in the commonest events. The case may be stated thus:

(1) The universe is dual, consisting of matter and spirit.

(2) These complements act and react upon each other.

(3) The whole is under one supreme control, infinitely intelligent, possessing illimitable resources of wisdom and efficiency. As Omniscience surveys all things, Omnipotence works in all things.

(4) In some things it pleases God to show his knowledge, as in prophecy; in some, his power, as in converting prophecy into history. Where he does this we call the event supernatural and miraculous.

(5) But in truth there is as much of the supernatural, i.e. as much of the presence and working of God, where he does not show it in deviations from the usual, as where he does so deviate.

Therefore we may:

(1) Rejoice evermore.

(2) Pray without ceasing.

(3) In everything give thanks. J.A.M.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

angel

(See Scofield "Heb 1:4")

The Scofield Reference Bible (1917 edition), notes by C. I. Scofield — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

The evangelist now returns to the story of the Savior:

v. 19. But when Herod was dead, behold, an angel of the Lord appeareth in a dream to Joseph in Egypt,

v. 20. saying, Arise, and take the young Child and His mother, and go into the land of Israel; for they are dead which sought the young Child’s life.

Herod died at Jericho in the year 750 after the founding of Rome. And his son Antipater, heir apparent to the throne, who had inherited his father’s cruel disposition, had been put to death at the tyrant’s command, five days before he himself yielded up his soul. So they whose murderous designs were most apparent were no longer living. The angel therefore gave Joseph the command to return to the land of Israel. No immediate danger threatened the Savior’s life. No apprehension need be felt regarding His safety. There is nothing, no person to fear: Go! Note again that Matthew always gives to the Christ-child the prominent position to which His divinity entitles Him. He is to be kept foremost in the minds and hearts of all readers.

Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Observe, 1. Herod’s death: like a bloody persecutor, he is sent unlamented to his grave. Historians say, that out of his body issued forth such impure streams of blood that the loathsomeness and pain made him attempt the killing of himself. God seldom suffers persecuters to pass in quiet to their graves; they rarely die the common death of all men, having no other balm at their funeral than their own blood.

Observe, 2. The happy consequence of Herod’s death. Christ is now called home without danger: Herod being sent to his grave, the coast is clear for the return of the holy family. The death of persecutors is the delivery of the persecuted.

Observe, 3. An angel is dispatched to acquaint Joseph with Herod’s death.

O! how cheerfully do those glorious spirits execute the commands of their sovereign Master! With what delight do they carry the message of God’s kindness to their fellow-creatures!

Lord, what an argument is this of thy love unto us, that in this our pilgrimage state thou allowest us thine own royal guard to attend and preserve us!

William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

THE HOLY FAMILY RETURN FROM EGYPT

19-23, & Luk 2:39-40. “And Herod having died.” We do not know how long they remained in Egypt, but evidently the period was brief. Scarcely has the wail of the slaughtered infants died away on the air of Bethlehem till the cruel old king, becoming quite ill, goes to Jericho, where he had a palace and a pool, that he may avail himself of the sanitary warm baths for the recovery of his health. Even there he slays Antipater, his only surviving son by his first wife, Mary Anne, whom he had slain, with her other two sons, Alexander and Aristobulus; this dark crime only preceding five days his own exit to meet God and enter upon the awful retributions of eternity. “Behold, an angel of the Lord appears to Joseph in a dream in Egypt: Arise, take the young child and His mother, and go into Israel, for those seeking the life of the young child are dead. And he, rising, took the young child and His mother, and came into Israel. And hearing that Archelaus rules over Judea in the room of Herod his father, he feared to go thither.” Archelaus, being the only surviving son of Herod, received the government nominally by inheritance. We must remember that after the battle of Actium, which left Augustus Caesar sole proprietor of the Roman Empire, which had conquered the whole world, consequently no king in any country could reign till he went to Rome and received his crown at the hand of the emperor; consequently, immediately after the death of Herod, Archelaus went away to Rome, a long and perilous journey for those times, in order that the emperor might crown him king of the Jews. Now it is a simple fact that the emperor positively refused to crown him, so that Archelaus was really never king of Judea. On the contrary, the emperor sent Coponius to Judea, in the capacity of proconsul, thus dismantling the kingdom, and turning it into a Roman province, no longer having its own king, but simply a governor, sent out by the Roman emperor, to rule that country as a Roman province. Now why did this transition take place at this peculiar time? Why, it was a fulfillment of prophecy, which says, “The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, till Shiloh [i.e., Christ] comes.” Now do you not see this wonderful fulfillment of prophecy? Augustus Caesar had crowned Herod king of the Jews, and why not now crown Archelaus, and let the Jews have their kingdom, instead of reducing them to a state of vassalage by taking away their kingdom, and making them a Roman province? The solution is plain. Shiloh had already come, and the scepter had departed from Judah. Though the Roman emperor knew nothing about these prophecies nor their fulfillment, yet arbitrarily taking the bit in his teeth, he proceeded, undeviatingly, literally to fulfill the prophecies. So are wicked worldly people this day fulfilling the prophecies with astounding accuracy.

“Being warned in a dream, he departed into the regions of Galilee. Having come, he dwelt in a city called Nazareth; in order that the word spoken by the prophets may be fulfilled, that He shall be called a Nazarene.” (Isa 11:1.)

The village of Nazareth was so obscure and insignificant as never so much as to receive a mention in all the Old Testament Scriptures. It was proverbial for ignorance and poverty, so that the maxim obtained, “No good can come out of Nazareth;” thus illustrating the universally patent fact that this world is upside down, human estimation all wrong, and the very opposite of the Divine and true. Though Nazareth in human estimation was the most worthless place on the earth, it has come to the front, more celebrated and honored than all the time-honored metropolises on the globe. The same is true of the people. Examine all history. Those who have risen to true eminence have emanated from utter obscurity; while the high-born, as a rule, dwindle into insignificance, never amounting to anything. I did so much enjoy my sojourn in Nazareth, happily reached by Jewish and Christian enterprise, now quite flourishing, with a population of seven thousand. How I did enjoy walking through the house where Jesus dwelt thirty years; visiting Joseph’s carpenter-shop, where He labored with him at the work-bench; and the old synagogue, where He actually worshipped the God of Israel thirty years! The primitive Christians were called “Nazarenes.”

“And the little child grew and became strong in spirit, being filled with wisdom; and the grace of God was upon Him.” (Luk 2:40.) No wonder the body of Jesus grew and symmetrically developed with rolling years, as He had no physical infirmities, superinduced by the fall. Consequently He never had any sickness to impede His growth, His physical life throughout being like that of Adam before the fall, perfectly healthy, natural, and free from all ailments of any kind. This conclusion follows as a legitimate sequence from the very fact that He took our nature, without sin and its consequence; i.e., without infirmity. His spiritual development was truly marvelous, from the simple fact that His intellect was perfectly clear and cloudless, never muddled, nor confused, nor in any way thrown off its equilibrium. His affections were perfectly pure, and never contaminated by anything vile. His memory was perfect, so that He never forgot anything, while His judgment was infallible, even while in childhood. Hence He was actually filled with the true wisdom of God peculiar to the heavenly state; while the grace of God, not only filled, but crowned Him.

William B. Godbey, Commentary on the New Testament (1896–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

J. W. McGarvey's The Fourfold Gospel [XV. Brought to Nazareth].

XV. THE CHILD JESUS BROUGHT FROM EGYPT TO NAZARETH. (Egypt and Nazareth, B. C. 4.) aMATT. II. 19-23; cLUKE II. 39.

a19 But when Herod was dead [He died in the thirty-seventh year of his reign and the seventieth of his life. A frightful inward burning consumed him, and the stench of his sickness was such that his attendants could not stay near him. So horrible was his condition that he even endeavored to end it by suicide], behold, an angel of the Lord [word did not come by the infant Jesus; he was "made like unto his brethren" ( Heb_2:17), and being a child, "he spake as a child" ( 1Co_13:11), and not as an oracle] appeareth in a dream to Joseph in Egypt [Joseph had obeyed the command given at Mat_2:13, and God kept the promise contained therein. God ever keeps covenant with the obedient], saying, 20 Arise [Happy Joseph! his path was ordered of God. Let us also seek such ordering. "in all thy ways acknowledge him, And he will direct thy paths-- Pro_3:6] and take the young child and his mother, and go into the land of Israel [The phrase "land of Israel" originally meant all Palestine, but during the period of the kingdom of the ten tribes it was restricted to their portion of the country. After the captivities and the return of Judah from Babylon the phrase resumed its original meaning, and hence it is here used to include all Palestine. As Jesus was "not sent but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel" ( Mat_15:24), it was fitting that he return thither from Egypt]; for they ["They" is doubtless the plural of majesty; though it may include others unknown to us, who were employed by him or advised him] are dead [How prophetic the words! Christ's enemies die, but he lives on. How innumerable this host of opposers! Persecutors, oppressors, infidels, critics, literatures, [53] organizations, principalities, and powers, a vast and motley array of forces, have sought the life of Jesus, have made a great noise in the world, and died away in silence. Pharoahs, Neros, Diocletians, many a Charles, Torquemada and Bloody Mary have come up and gone down, but the king of Israel lives on] that sought the young child's life. 21 And he arose and took the young child and his mother, and came [The length of his sojourn in Egypt is uncertain. It is variously estimated at from two weeks to more than seven months] into the land of Israel. 22 But when he heard [Joseph heard this on entering Palestine. As he knew of Herod's death by revelation, and hence before any one else in Egypt, there was no one there to tell him who succeeded Herod] that Archelaus [By his last will and testament Herod divided his kingdom among three of his sons, and Augustus Cæsar consented to the provision of this will. Archelaus, under the title of Ethnarch, received Judæa, Idumæa, and Samaria; Antipas, under the title of Tetrarch, received Galilee and Peræa; and Philip, under the title of Tetrarch, received Trachonitis (with Ituræa), Batanæa, and Auranitis. Each of these sons bore the name of Herod, like their father. Augustus withheld from Archelaus the title of king, promising it to him "if he governed that part virtuously." But in the very beginning of his reign he massacred three thousand Jews at once, in the temple, at the time of the Passover, because they called for justice upon the agents who performed the barbarities of his father's reign. Not long after this a solemn embassy of the Jews went to Rome, and petitioned Augustus to remove Archelaus, and make his kingdom a Roman province. After a reign of nine years, Archelaus was banished to Vienne, in Gaul, where he died in A. D. 6. After him Judæa had no more native kings, and the scepter was clean departed from Judah. The land became a Roman province, and its governors were successively Quirinius, Coponius, Ambivius, Annius Rufus, Valerius Gratus, and Pontius Pilate] was reigning over Judæa in the room of his father Herod [These words sound like an echo of those employed by the [54] embassy just referred to, for it said to Augustus concerning this man, "He seemed to be so afraid lest he should not be deemed Herod's own son, that he took special care to prove it"], he was afraid to go thither [As Matthew has spoken of Joseph residing at Bethlehem (and he did reside there for quite awhile after the birth of Jesus), the use of word "thither" implies that Joseph planned to return to that town. Mary had kindred somewhere in the neighborhood ( Luk_1:36, Luk_1:39, Luk_1:40), and doubtless both parents thought that David's city was the most fitting place for the nurture of David's heir]; and being warned i of God in a dream [God permitted Joseph to follow the bent of his fear. Joseph's obedience shows him a fit person for the momentous charge entrusted to him], { cthey returned ahe withdrew [From the territory of Archelaus to that of Antipas, who was a man of much milder disposition. As the brothers were on no good terms, Joseph felt sure that in no case would Antipas deliver him and his to Archelaus] into the parts of Galilee [It means "circuit." It is the northern of the three divisions of the Holy Land. Its population was very dense, and was a mixture of Jews and Gentiles. Hence all Galilæans were despised by the purer Jews of Judæa], 23 and he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth; ctheir own city [This town lies on a hillside, girt in by fifteen higher hills. It is a secluded nook. Here Jesus grew up in obscurity till he reached his thirtieth year. Here he spent about nine-tenths of his earthly life. Sweet humility! Lowliness is as rare and precious a virtue as pride is a plentiful and repugnant vice] athat it might be fulfilled which was spoken through the prophets [Matthew uses the plural, "prophets," because this prophecy is not the actual words of any prophet, but is the general sense of many of them. We have noted three kinds of prophecy; this is the fourth kind, viz.: one where the very trend or general scope of Scripture is itself a prophecy], that he should be called a Nazarene. [The Hebrew word netzer means "branch" or "sprout." It is used figuratively for that which is lowly or despised ( Isa_17:9, Eze_15:1-6, Mal_4:1). [55] See also Joh_15:6, Rom_11:21. Now, Nazareth, if derived from netzer, answered to its name, and was a despised place ( Joh_1:45, Joh_1:46), and Jesus, though in truth a Bethlehemite, bore the name Nazarene because it fitly expressed the contempt of those who despised and rejected him.]

[FFG 53-55]

J. W. McGarvey (with Philip Y. Pendleton), Commentaries on the New Testament (The Fourfold Gospel, 1914; Acts; and the epistles) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

19. But when Herod was dead. This event was the signal for the return to Judea. He died in the spring of the year 750 after the building of Rome, just before the passover. This would place his death nearly four years before the Christian era, the date from which we reckon our time. That was not fixed upon until five hundred years after the birth of Christ, and was fixed erroneously.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

Connecting Statement:

Here the scene shifts to Egypt, where Joseph, Mary, and the young Jesus are living.

behold

This marks the beginning of another event in the larger story. It may involve different people than the previous events. Your language may have a way of doing this.

those who sought the child's life

Here "sought the child's life" is a way of saying they wanted to kill the child. "AT: "those who were looking for the child in order to kill him" (See: Euphemism)

those who sought

This refers to King Herod and his advisors.

translationWords

Herod the Great

angel

lord

dream

Joseph (NT)

Egypt

Israel

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

19–21. THE RETURN FROM EGYPT

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

19. And when Herod was dead, behold, an angel of the Lord appeareth in a dream to Joseph in Egeypt, saying.] For the construction see on 2:1.—κατʼ ὄναρ] see on 1:20.

(P)

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.