Mark 22.

ch. iv. 22,

15, 46.

·

from the same district travelling together for security and company. The interpretation that they went a day's journey, seeking him,' is simply absurd: for they would have turned back sooner: a few minutes might have sufficed for the search. It was not till they laid up for the night that they missed him, as at that time they would naturally expect his return to their own tent. Olshausen remarks, that being accustomed to His thoughtfulness and obedience, they were free from anxiety, till they discovered He really was not in the company. 45. seeking him every where] as they went back, all the way. 46.] Some interpret the three days, of their one day's journey out, one back, and one in Jerusalem: but they were more likely three days spent in search in Jerusalem; or, at all events, reckoned from their discovery of His not being with them. in the temple] In one of the rooms attached to the temple, where the Rabbis taught their schools. No stress must be laid on in the midst; it is only among. Nor must it be supposed from asking them questions that our Lord was acting the part of a master. It was the custom in the Jewish schools for, the scholars to ask questions of their teachers; and a great part of the Rabbinical books consists of the answers of the Rabbis to such questions. 48-50.] The salient point of this narrative appears to lie in thy father contrasted with my Father. This was the first time that those wonderful words of self-consciousness had been heard from the holy Child - when He began to be "a son of the law," He first calls HIM His Father, Who gave Him the

work to do on earth, of perfectly keeping that Law. Every word of these verses is of the first importance to modern combatants for sound doctrine. Let the adversaries answerus,-why should his mother here have spoken, and not Joseph, unless there were some more than usual reason for her being put forward rather than his reputed father? Again, let the mythical school of Strauss give us a reason, why an incident altogether (in their view) so derogatory to the character of the subject of it, should have been inserted, if the myths arose out of an exaggerated estimate of the dignity of that character?

thy father] Then up to this time Joseph had been so called by the holy Child Himself: but from this time, never. Such words are not chance; had Mary said "we," the strong contrast with what follows could not have been brought out.

How is it that ye sought me ?] i. e. what (reason) is there, that . This is no reproachful question. It is asked in all the simplicity and boldness of holy childhood. . . 'did ye not know ?'... it appeared as if that conviction, the expression of which now first breaks forth from HIM, must have been a matter known to them before. I must] This

is that must, so often used by our Lord of His appointed and undertaken course. Analogous to this first utterance of His conviction, is the dawn, amongst ourselves, of the principle of duty in the youthful and well-trained spirit about this same age, this 'earing time' of human progress: see below on ver. 52.

among

my Father's matters] primarily, in the house of my Father; but we must not

xviii. 34.

& read, and.

b

or it

may exclude the wider sense, which embraces all places and employments of my Father's. The employment in which he was found, learning the word of God, would naturally be one of these. they understood not] Both Joseph and His mother knew in some sense, Who He was: but were not prepared to hear so direct an appeal to God as His Father: understood not the deeper sense of these wonderful words. Still (ver. 51) they appear to have awakened in the mind of His mother a remem. brance of " He shall be called the Son of God," ch. i. 35. And probably, as Stier remarks, the unfolding of His childhood had been so gradual and natural, that even they had not been forcibly reminded by any strong individual notes, of that which He was, and which now shewed itself.

It is a remarkable instance of the blindness of the rationalistic Commentators to the richness and depth of Scripture narrative, that they hold this understood not to be altogether inconceivable, as coming after the angelic announcement to Mary. Can they suppose, that she understood that announcement itself? The right interpretation is, they understood not the deeper sense: see ch. xviii. 34.

51.] The high consciousness which had manifested itself in ver. 49 did not interfere with His self-humiliation, nor render Him independent of His parents. This voluntary subjection probably shewed itself in working at his reputed father's trade: see Mark vi. 2 and note. From this

time we have no more mention of Joseph: the next we hear is of His mother and brethren (John ii. 12): whence it is inferred that, between this time and the commencement of our Lord's public life, Joseph died. and his mother kept...] These words tend to confirm the common belief that these opening chapters, or at least this narrative, may have been derived from the testimony of the mother of the Lord herself. She kept them, as in wonderful coincidence with the remarkable circunstances of His birth, and its announcement, and His presentation in the temple, and the offerings of the Magi;

Dan. vii. 28.

ver. 40.

52.]

but in what way, or by what one great revelation, all these things were to be gathered in one, did not yet appear, but was doubtless manifested to her afterwards see Acts i. 14; ii. 1. The Greek word rendered stature means not only that (as in ch. xix. 3), but age (see Matt. vi. 27, where the word is the same, and note), which comprehends the other.

During these eighteen mysterious years we may, by the light of what is here revealed, view the holy Child advancing onward to that fulness of wisdom and divine approval which was indicated at His Baptism, by "in thee I am well pleased." We are apt to forget, that it was during this time that much of the great work of the second Adam was done. The growing up through infancy, childhood, youth, manhood, from grace to grace, holiness to holiness, in subjection, self-denial, and love, without one polluting touch of sin,-this it was which, consummated by the three years of active ministry, by the Passion, and by the Cross, constituted "the obedience of one man,' by which many were made righteous. We must fully appreciate the words of this verse, in order to think rightly of Christ. He had emptied Himself of His glory: His infancy and childhood were no mere pretence, but the Divine Personality was in Him carried through these states of weakness and inexperience, and gathered round itself the ordinary accessions and experiences of the sons of men. All the time, the consciousness of his mission on earth was ripening; the things heard of the Father' (John xv. 15) were continually imparted to Him; the Spirit, which was not given by measure to Him, was abiding more and more upon Him; till the day when He was fully ripe for his official manifestation,- that He might be offered to his own, to receive or reject Him, and then the Spirit led Him up to commence his conflict with the enemy. As yet, He was in favour with man also: the world had not yet begun to hate Him; but we cannot tell how soon this feeling towards Him was changed, for

a John xi. 49,

Acts iv. 6.

He alleges John_vii. 7), "Me the world hateth, because I testify of it that its deeds are evil;" and we can hardly conceive such testimony, in the years of gathering vigour and zeal, long withheld. The incident of ch, iv. 28, 29 can scarcely have arisen only from the anger of the

moment.

CHAP. III. 1-22.] PREACHING AND BAPTISM OF JOHN. DIVINE TESTIMONY TO JESUS AT HIS BAPTISM. Matt. iii. 1-17. Mark i. 4-11. 1.] These dates are consistent with the accurate tracing down which St. Luke predicates of himself, ch. i. 3. In Matt. iii. 1 we have the same events indicated as to time by only "In those days." The fifteenth year of the sole principate of Tiberius began Aug. 19, in the year of Rome 781, and reckoning backwards thirty years from that time (see ver. 23), we should have the birth of our Lord in 751, or about then; for "about thirty" will admit of some latitude. But Herod the Great died in the beginning of the year 750, and our Lord's birth must be fixed some months at least before the death of Herod. If then it be placed in 749, He would have been at least thirty-two at the time of His baptism, seeing that it took place some time after the beginning of John's ministry. This difficulty has led to the supposi tion that this fifteenth year is not to be dated from the sole, but from the associated principate of Tiberius, which commenced most probably at the end of 764. Accord

ing to this, the fifteenth of Tiberius will begin at the end of 779-and our Lord's birth would be 749 or 750: which will agree with the death of Herod. This latter explanation has usually been adopted. Our present æra was fixed by Dionysius Exiguus, in the sixth century, and places the birth of our Lord in 754. It may be doubted, however, whether in all these reckonings more accuracy has not been sought than the Gospel narrative warrants any expectation of our finding. The "about thirty is a wide expression, and might cover any age from thirty (see note on ver. 23) to thirty-two or thirty-three.

See on Matt. ii. 2, where it appears probable from astronomical considerations, that our Lord was born as early as U.C. 747. Pontius Pilate .] Pilate

was only Procurator of Judæa: the word governor being used promiscuously of the leading officers of the Roman government. PONTIUS PILATE was the sixth procurator from the deposition of Archelaus, and came to Judæa about the year of Rome 779. He held the province ten years, and was sent to Rome to answer for his conduct by Vitellius, prefect of Syria, in 789, the year of the death of Tiberius. See chronological table in the Introduction to the Acts. Herod] See note on Matt. xiv. 1. HEROD ANTIPAS became tetrarch of Galilee after the death of his father Herod, in the year of Rome 750, and continued till he was deposed in 792. Philip] Son of Herod the Great by Cleopatra, a woman of Jerusalem. He was brought up at Rome, and after his father's death in 750, was made tetrarch of Batanæa, Gaulonitis, Trachonitis, Panias, Auranitis (Batanæa and Auranitis make up Ituræa), and continued till his death in 786 or 787. He built Cæsarea Philippi. He was by far the best of Herod's sons, and ruled his portion mildly and well. He must not be confounded with his half-brother Philip, whose wife Herodias Herod Antipas seduced. This latter was disinherited by his father, and lived in privacy. See note on Matt. xiv. 1. Lysanias the tetrarch

of Abilene] ABILENE, the district round Abila, a town eighteen miles north of Damascus, now, according to Pococke, Nebi Abel. It must not be confounded with Abila in Decapolis. Josephus mentions it as among the districts which Claudius gave to king Agrippa I. under the name of Abila of Lysanias, and in another place as the Kingdom called that of Lysanias. See further in note in my Greek Testament. It seems to have been a district patrimonially in possession of rulers bearing this name. 2.] ANNAS (Ananus, Josephus) the high priest, was deposed by Valerius Gratus (in the year of Rome 779), and after several changes, Joseph or Caiaphas, his son-in-law (John xviii. 13), was made high priest. It would appear from this verse (and the use of the singular-see margin-renders the inference more stringent. Compare also St. Luke's own phrase, Acts iv. 6) that Annas, as ex-high priest, and possibly retaining in the view of the Jews the legitimate high priesthood, was