kingdom of heaven is greater than he (Matt. 11: 2, &c.). John was at last put to death by the executioner. On Herod's birthday the daughter of Herodias danced before him, and so greatly pleased him, that he promised her with an oath that he would grant any wish which she might express; the princess, instigated by her mother, asked that the head of John the Baptist should be given to her in a charger. Herod unwillingly complied, for his oath's sake and for their sakes who sat with him at meat, and John was beheaded in the prison (Mark 6: 21-28).

§ 124. The Genealogy of Christ.

-It is the chief purpose

Matt. 1: 1-17; Luke 3: 23-38. of the genealogical table of Christ, which embraces fully four thousand years, and is unparalleled in its nature, to show the connection that really and, indeed, necessarily existed between Christ and the ancestor of the people of Israel, on the one hand, from whom the promised salvation was to proceed, and the ancestor of the whole human race, on the other, whose Saviour he was declared to be. Christ was the fruit of the historical development both of Israel in particular, and of the entire human. race in general; and it was important that the essential connection between the fruit and the root should be distinctly set forth. Matthew, whose Gospel was intended for the Jews, does not trace the genealogy of Christ further than Abraham; his object is attained when the connection of the Redeemer with the line of promise of the Old Testament is proved. As Luke wrote his Gospel for Gentiles, he necessarily continued the genealogy to Adam, the common ancestor of all nations, for the purpose of showing to them that Christ was a partaker of their flesh and blood also.

OBS.—The difference between the two genealogies is most easily explained by referring to the particular object which each Evangelist had in view in commencing to write. It was the main object of Matthew, when he composed his Gospel, to demonstrate that Jesus was the Messiah promised in the Old Testament; it was, accordingly, incumbent on him to furnish the evidence that Jesus was the lawful heir and successor to whom the royalty of David belonged, and that the fundamental prophecy in 2 Sam. ch. 7 was thus fulfilled. In ac

cordance with his leading design, he necessarily showed the legal connection (derived from the laws of inheritance) of Christ with the house of David in the line of Solomon. If this descent, although fixed by the laws, did not coincide with Christ's descent after the flesh, the latter was passed over, and the former was set forth as entitled to recognition. As Luke wrote for Christians who proceeded from the Gentile world, no necessity existed for giving prominence to that line of succession which was valid in law in a theocratical point of view; it was, on the contrary, far more important, in accordance with his main object, to set forth Christ's true descent after the flesh. The two tables begin to vary in assigning names respectively to the individuals representing the generation immediately following David-his two sons Solomon and Nathan. They coincide again on reaching Salathiel, the father of Zorobabel, who is descended from Solomon, according to Matthew, but from Nathan, another son of David (Zech. 12 : 12), according to Luke. This variation is easily explained, in perfect consistency with historical events (1 Chron. 3: 17, &c.), by assuming that a levirate marriage (described in 2 66. B. Oвs. 2), had occurred: namely, Matthew states Zorobabel's descent, according to the laws of inheritance, while Luke relates his descent after the flesh. The tables again differ after the introduction of the name of Zorobabel, and do not coincide till they reach the name of Joseph, the husband of Mary. Joseph's father, according to Luke is Heli, but, according to Matthew it is Jacob. Among the many attempts which have been made to explain this apparent contradiction, none seems more successful than the one which produces the result that Joseph became the son of Heli by his marriage with Mary. If Mary was a daughter capable of inheriting, that is, the heiress of the family estate, in consequence of having no brother (Num. 27 : 8), she could not marry except in her own tribe (Num. 36: 4-10); her husband's name took the place in the genealogy which belonged really to her according to her true descent, and he appeared as the son of Heli. According to this view, Luke furnishes in truth the genealogy of Mary, and, consequently, the evidence of Christ's descent from David after the flesh. This solution of the difficulty is supported by the circumstance, that in any aspect of the case, scriptural passages like the following, conclusively show that Christ, in his human nature, is a descendant of David after the flesh also: Isai. 7: 14; Micah 5: 2; Acts 2:30: Rom. 1:3; 2 Tim. 2:8; Heb. 7: 14, &c. The two genealogies would then admit of the following adjustment, illustrating their perfect agreement:

1. Mary, the noble virgin of David's royal race, was the woman who was chosen to be the mother of the Saviour (§ 129. Obs.); she was poor and obscure in the world, but was chosen of the Lord and precious, rich in child-like humility, in tenderness of feeling, in submissiveness of spirit and in faith. In her the most delicate and lovely traits of womanhood were unfolded, and the loftiest vocation of woman was demonstrated; hence, the whole race was blessed in her. As the mother of the second Adam, with whom the new development of the human race commenced, she is an antitype of the first woman, and may, in a higher sense, be called "the mother of all living." (Gen. 3: 20.) The Lord had chosen her before those ancestors lived, whose many names appear in her genealogy; she was, in a certain sense, the person really designated, when Abraham was called, when David was anointed, &c. For, that woman, of whom the Saviour was born when God was manifested in the flesh, terminated the long series of generations (§ 14. OBS. 1) which, although involved in the general curse of human sinfulness (Ps. 51: 5), was, nevertheless, sustained by the life-giving power of

the divine counsel; that series, like a golden chain, passes onward, without interruption, through the whole course of development which precedes the Christian era. Of this chain, Mary forms the last link; with her that generation which is merely human ceases, giving place to that immediate and divine generation which itself closes entirely the development belonging to the Old Testament.

OBS.-The whole sex to which Mary belongs, and of which she is the representative, is honored by the holy call which she received. The shame and the curse in which the female sex was involved through the first woman, are abolished in Mary, and woman is raised up from that low degree to which she had been reduced by a sinful development; that sex, hitherto oppressed in manifold ways, and despised, henceforth assumes an entirely different and a loftier position. ( 132. 1, OBS.) The wonderfully impressive salutation which the angel addressed to the meek and lowly handmaid of the Lord (Luke 1: 28), constitutes the turning-point in the history of the female sex, and is, in this aspect, a salutation which deeply interests the whole world.

2. Luke 1: 26, &c. In the sixth month after the announcement respecting John, the angel Gabriel appeared to the virgin Mary and addressed to her these words of salutation: “Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women." And he said, further, "The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee, shall be called the Son of God." And Mary said: "Behold the handmaid of the Lord, be it unto me according to thy word." When Mary afterwards visited her cousin Elizabeth, the latter thus addressed her: "Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb. And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?" Then Mary's heart was filled with gratitude, and she praised the Lord who had done great things to her; "for," said she, "he hath regarded the low estate of his handmaiden: for, behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed."

§ 126. The Birth of Jesus.

"Behold, a virgin shall conceive," &c. (Isa. 7 : 14. "But thou, Beth-lehem Ephratah," &c. (Mic. 52.

101. 1.)

101. 3.)

Matt. 1: 18-25; Luke 2:1-20.—In the mean time, Joseph of Nazareth, who had been instructed concerning these things by an angel in a dream, took unto him Mary, who was espoused to him; and as the emperor Augustus had, about the same time, issued an edict that a general census of the empire should be taken, Joseph, who was of the house and lineage of David, proceeded to Bethlehem, the original seat of his family. Here Mary brought forth a son; she laid the child in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn. The glad tidings were first conveyed, not to the scribes in Jerusalem, but to the shepherds in the field. The glory of the Lord shone round about them, and the angel of the Lord said to them: "Behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people. For unto you is born this day in the city of David, a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord." And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God, and saying: "Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men." When the angels were gone away from them into heaven, the shepherds came and found the babe, and told all that had occurred to them. Mary kept all these things, and pondered them in her heart. The shepherds departed, glorifying and praising God.

OBS. 1.—The words of the Apostles' Creed: "Jesus Christ.... was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the virgin Mary," present the two aspects in which the incarnation of God is to be viewed; they deny, on the one hand, that any connection exists between him and the human race, as far as original sin is concerned, but they affirm, on the other hand, that he is of the same nature, and appears in the same form. For Christ could not redeem the world from sin, unless he was without sin himself, and consequently, it was indispensably necessary that he should not be born of a father and a mother, as we all are, since the hereditary sinfulness of man would, in that case, have been transmitted to him also. (? 14. OBS. 2.) It was, much rather, requisite that his human nature should acquire