Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadJohn Kitto Evening Bible Devotions: July 27
Today is: Wednesday, April 24th, 2024 (Show Today's Devotion)
Select a Day for a Devotion in the Month of July: (Show All Months)
Mat_2:3-12
It has, however, been conjectured by some, that the star did conduct them to Judea, and then supposing they no longer needed its guidance, they turned aside to Jerusalem, and so lost sight of it till they were again in the right way. But it seems to be forgotten that Jerusalem was in the right way to Bethlehem, if, as we suppose, they had come across the river Jordan. Under any hypothesis, it was perfectly natural that they should proceed to, or pause at, the metropolitan city. Where else should they expect to find or to hear of the illustrious new born? Surely there were high rejoicings in all her palaces; surely the glorious news was ringing through all her streets and market places, and was celebrated in her renowned temple. They reasonably supposed that any one they accosted would be most readily able to answer their simple question, “Where is He that is born King of the Jews?” and they could not but have been amazed and perplexed at the astonishment the question excited in those to whom it was addressed. Some of the people who heard this, however, thought it wisest to conduct them to the palace, as it seemed to be a matter of state, and might refer to something which had taken place there, though it had not yet been made known to the public. The tyrant who sat upon the throne “was troubled” at the question of the distinguished strangers. He knew the expectation of the Jews; and, so far as he shared it, a man of his temper could not but regard with jealousy and dismay the birth of an heir of David’s house, destined to re-establish his father’s throne, to conquer and to reign—circumstances which could not co-exist with the preservation of that power in his family which had been most bloodily won and unworthily exercised. Of the spiritual character of the Messiah’s reign, neither he nor his subjects generally, much less the Gentiles, had any conception: it was as a temporal king that he beheld Him; and hence a rival, to be put down and destroyed. How Herod was troubled is thus easily understood; but it is said the people were also troubled. How was that? They had nothing to fear, but much to hope. The Herodian family was not popular with them, and there were perhaps not fifty men in Israel who would have lifted a finger to save it from ruin. Was it, then, that because of their sins they dreaded a reign of righteousness, or that they feared this inquiry might lead to some new and frightful excess on the part of the king, whose suspicious and remorseless character was but too well known to them? We rest in the latter conclusion.
But still, how comes it to pass that the tidings of what had happened should be so new and surprising at Jerusalem, after the publication of the fact to and by the shepherds, and after the open declarations by Simeon and Anna in the temple itself? Something of it must have been heard; but as it seemed to refer to poor and obscure persons, it was but little regarded. But now when distinguished foreigners came from afar, in some state, and furnished with valuable presents, to make inquiries, the case is altered, and that which had before been little heeded, becomes at once a matter of serious consequence.
Herod at once saw that “the King of the Jews,” for whom the magi inquired, could be no other than the Messiah; his first step was therefore to summon the priests and scribes to obtain their authoritative decision as to the place where the Messiah was to be born. They at once named Bethlehem, quoting Mic_5:2, as the decisive text on the question. And here it may be noted that the body which gave this very satisfactory information respecting the place from which the Messiah was to come, was the same body which in a later day declared of Jesus: “We know this man whence He is; but when Christ cometh, no man knoweth whence he is. (Joh_7:27.)
The information he had obtained was made known by Herod to the magians; but he suffered them not to depart until in a private audience he had enjoined them to return to Jerusalem, to bring him word respecting the illustrious infant, that he also might repair thither to render him homage, and to lay his honors at the feet of the true heir of David’s royal house.
As the sages approached Bethlehem, they beheld again, with gladness, the star of which so much has been said already, and which spared them all trouble of inquiry, of search, or of circumstantial identification, by hovering over the house in which the humble pair had found refuge with the child. This, as we have already urged, shows that the star must have been some meteor low in the atmosphere, and not one of the fixed stars. Not, was this further appearance of the meteor needless; for the shepherds having withdrawn to the pastures, there were probably none among those whom the sages met in the streets at Bethlehem who could tell them anything of persons so obscure, or who, if they knew this, would recognize the child under such a designation as that which the stranger gave. And, besides this, the indication given by the star, by precluding the need of inquiry through the place, materially contributed to the safety of the child, imperiled as it no was by the fears and jealousy of the reigning tyrant.
Through the representations which painters have given of this scene, the impression has grown up, that the sages found the family still in the stable, and the babe lying in the manger. Indeed, the shepherds are often introduced into the scene, and even a cow or two, and perhaps a donkey, to complete the effect. But painters are bad interpreters of Scripture scenes, caring more for the picturesque than for the true, and being in general but too ready to sacrifice the one to the other. In this case the opportunity of contrasting the magnificence of the of the “three kings” in “barbaric pearl and gold,” with the homeliness of the stable and the roughness of the shepherds, has not often been resisted, though it must be obvious that the sages made a journey—probably a long one—to the spot, subsequent to the time at which the shepherds had seen the infant Savior. Indeed, we have all along assumed that it took place more than a month after—that is, after Joseph and Mary had returned from presenting the child in the temple, and performing the rites of purification. In this interval, the crowds who were at Bethlehem at the time of the Nativity must have taken their departure, leaving the place comparatively empty; and it was no longer needful to remain in the stable, or difficult to obtain such lodging as they desired. They, therefore, doubtless removed from the stable to the khan itself, or as probably to some humble dwelling in the town that might happen to be vacant.
For the obscure circumstances in which they found the infant they had come so far to honor, the strangers must in some measure have been prepared, by what had happened to them at Jerusalem; and being, on the best evidence, assured that they had indeed found Him whom they sought, and to whose birth the very heavens had borne witness, they bowed to the decrees of Providence—though so mysterious, and so contrary to what, on natural calculation, they had expected—and bent low in homage before the holy child. It is said in the authorized version, that they “fell down and worshipped Him.” The term rendered “worship,” indicates the posture of prostration which was usual to the people of the East, both in paying divine adoration to the Deity, and in manifesting reverence for their kings; and, in like manner, our English word “worship” bore the twofold signification of respect and of adoration at the time our translation was made. So, in a contemporary publication, Note: A Christian Dictionary—opening the Signification of the chief Words dispersed generally through Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament, tending to increase Christian Knowledge. By Thomas Wilson, Minister of the Word at St. George’s, in Canterbury. London: Printed by William Jaggard, dwelling in Barbican. First edition, 1611; third, 1622. there are four significations given to the word, and the first is, “Civill reverence due unto men for their authoritie and gifts. Mat_9:18—‘There came a certain ruler and worshipped him.’ This is civil reverence.” This sense of the word is now obsolete, though a relict of it is preserved from those times in the formal designation of certain magistrates and other functionaries, as “Right worshipful,” and “Worshipful;” and in addressing them as “Your worship.” Seeing that his divine character formed no part of the popular expectation of the Messiah then entertained by either Jews or Gentiles, there seems no reason to suppose that the worship rendered by the magians was any other than the highest civil homage. Yet we know not to what extent they may have been specially enlightened in this matter; and it is certain that the Christians from a very early date deduced, either from this adoration, or from the gifts offered, or from both, an argument even then that Christ was God. Note: So Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, Tertullian, Origen, etc.
The universal usage of the East not to approach the presence of a superior, particularly a sovereign, without some valuable gift, found expression in the costly but portable offerings of gold, myrrh, and frankincense which these eastern sages offered to the infant Messiah. The nature of these articles has been supposed to supply an additional argument for the conclusion that they came from Arabia, as these were usually regarded as the produce of that country. But, in fact, gold, myrrh, and frankincense were too much diffused through the East, and, from their value, were too generally used as presents to superiors, to indicate with any certainty the quarter from which the magi came, and leave open the other grounds on which we conclude that they came, not from Arabia, but from the regions beyond the Euphrates.