summation, so there is a regularity in the unfolding of the stem, which is, as it were, the inmost vein of life of mankind, from which the Messiah was to proceed. This fundamental idea Bengel conceived (in the Gnomon to the passage) in a very correct manner; but the additions, as well as his chronological system with which he connects it, appear to me untenable. (For the particulars of this subject we must refer to the exposition of the Revelation of John).

Something singular and quite marvellous is exhibited, moreover, in a genealogical table with which the Evangelists begin the record of the life of Christ, in which mention is made of three times fourteen and seventy-five ancestors, respectively, comprising a period of 2000 or 4000 years. The possibility of constructing a genealogical table such as this, progressing always in an uninterrupted line from father to son, of a family that dwelt for a long time in the utmost retirement, and comprising a period of thousands of years, would be inexplicable, (for even those renowned families in modern times, of whose genealogies millions of human beings boast, are unable to trace their pedigree through a period of a thousand years, and none indeed progresses in such an uninterrupted line), had not the members of this ancestorial line been endowed with a thread, by means of which they were able to extricate themselves from the many families into which every tribe and branch was again subdivided, in order thus to hold fast or to know the member that was destined to continue the lineage. This thread was the hope that the Messiah would be born from the race of Abraham and David. The ardent desire to behold him, and to become partakers of his mercy and glory, did not suffer the attention to be exhausted through a period embracing thousands of years. According to the divine dispensation, therefore, the member who was destined to continue the lineage became easily distinguishable, whenever he was doubtful; thereby the hope of a final fulfilment was awakened anew, and kept alive until it was consummated. An excellent representation of the marvel contained in the construction of this genealogy, is given by Köppen in his work, Die

That the Jews paid minute attention to their genealogical tables, even at a subsequent period, is shown by Julius Africanus, (Euseb. i. 7). Herod caused them to be sought for, and had them destroyed, in order that no one might be able to prove that his family was of greater antiquity than the reigning dynasty royal.

Bibel, ein Werk der göttlichen Weisheit (Leipz. 1798, 2 vols. 8vo. Comp. vol. ii. p. 199, sqq.), a new edition of which is preparing by Scheibel.

§ 2. THE BIRTH OF JESUS.

(Matth. i. 18-25).

The narrative of St Matthew respecting the birth of Jesus, bears the character of the greatest simplicity and conciseness; there is an utter absence of chronological and topographical reference throughout this narrative; the persons therein spoken of are supposed to be generally known to the readers; he only represents the great fact of the supernatural birth of Christ, which he does in a style of sober history, and without any embellishment whatever; he therein proves the fulfilment of the prophecy of the Old Testament, and, finally, he relates the guidance of Joseph in this wonderful event. The want of graphic representations which this narrative of St Matthew, together with his whole Gospel, betrays, is easily excused, inasmuch as the real historical narrative is evidently pervaded by a sober earnestness, which is less perceived in St Luke, in consequence of his poetical effusions. Hence, all those learned men are wrong who, notwithstanding their opposition to the general application of the mythical exposition to the history of Jesus, have not felt themselves bound to admit, that at least the history of the birth and infancy of Christ has been subject to mythical influences. Yet it is here, especially, that we perceive, most strikingly, the insufficiency of such a supposition, because, if the events have not taken place in the manner recorded by the Evangelists, profane ideas intrude upon the mind respecting the origin of Jesus. For, since Christ is undeniably an historical person, it follows that he must have been begotten and born; hence, the assertion that the Gospel-history betrays a mythical character, can favour that view only which destroys the notion of a Redeemer, viz. that Jesus entered into existence in an unholy manner, inasmuch as Mary was unmarried at the time when she carried him in her womb. The subterfuge which men have recourse to, that Jesus might have sprung from the marriage of Joseph and Mary, falls to the ground in consequence of its unhistorical character; for if this,

too, is a myth, viz. that Mary was pregnant before her marriage, we may regard it as equally mythical that Mary gave birth to Jesus, yea, that Jesus existed at all.

Besides, we shall find, on a closer examination, that what seemingly recommends the view of the mythical nature of the history of Christ's infancy, is rather opposed to it than otherwise. This is especially the case when we are referred to traditions concerning the birth of great men from pure virgins (Tagevoy Evers), as for instance Buddha, Zoroaster, Plato, and others. Such traditions are by no means opposed to biblical history, as little, indeed, as are analogous presentiments of an expected Redeemer. On the contrary, they bear witness to the very correct notion that noble minds are to be found in every nation: that nothing can result in the way of natural procreation (nor, therefore, from the womb of mankind), which could correspond with the ideal represented in the human mind: they vouch for the general desire of such a fact, for the longing after it, and hereby for its historical realisation. But since we have so sober an historical report as that of St Matthew, respecting the supernatural procreation of Jesus in the womb of a pure virgin, a report, too, which seems to have been rendered intentionally simple in order to divest it of everything imaginary; furthermore, as the actions of Jesus throughout his life confirm the assertion of his having been born in a supernatural manner, since the archetype of all things ideal was realised in him, which could never have been the case had he sprung from sinful humanity, and from the power that dwells therein; hence, the conviction, that that general desire has been indeed accomplished in the person of Jesus, obtains a foundation completely historical. To this must be added, that the narrative of the procreation of Christ through the Holy Ghost, stands in a necessary connection with his entire destination to be the physician and redeemer of infirm humanity, because it would have been impossible for any one who himself had sprung from the sinful human race, to heal the wounds from which it suffers. He, it is true, had to be intimately connected with men, to be of their flesh and of their bones (Ephes. v. 30), and yet at the same time without sin; for this reason he was not begotten from the sinful seed of man, but Mary was touched by a pure divine fire from heaven. If, therefore, in the person of Christ, we do not behold a mere human being, although one endowed with the greatest powers, but, on the con

trary, believe that in him the Word was made flesh (John i. 1, 14), the narrative of the supernatural procreation of Jesus not only will not be remarkable, but will appear as alone suitable to the Redeemer. A Redeemer begotten according to the flesh, and one sprung from the sinful race of man, is a notion that contradicts itself; the idea of a wrng requires that something sublime and heavenly, something that has no resting place in the lap of mankind, should become realised in him.' Finally, the mythical conception of the history of Christ's infancy is untenable, because the mother of Jesus lived a considerable length of time after the ascension; every apostle had access to her reports, and every error, therefore, would have been soon corrected by her testimony. With regard to the appearances of the angel, the mention of which in the narrative of St Matthew might be considered as very important to show its mythical character, we must remember, first of all, that the narrator reports the appearances of the angel as facts in this as well as other parts of his Gospel. Precisely in conformity with what we find in the Old Testament, the appearances of the angel are interwoven by St Matthew as real occurrences in the temporary order of the world with the other circle of facts to be reported, without intimating even in the least that the writer wishes them to be considered in any way whatever as fabulous expressions of internal psychological processes or ideal images conjured up by existing circumstances. The duty of the expounder extends beyond the de termination of a writer's views, only in so far as he not only interprets, but even justifies the result of his interpretation; a duty which cannot be denied, according to the present position of science. The following remarks may perhaps suffice for the present exigency. According to the testimony of holy writ, we must not suppose that angels are separated from men by a chasm not to be filled up; on the contrary, we are instructed on its authority to believe that they minister around and for him, and especially for the faithful (Heb. i. 14.) Their ministry is generally

1 The argument, "that a human father (Joseph) would no more interfere, than a human mother (Mary), with the purity of Jesus," only changes the position of this wonder without removing it. If we suppose an influence of the Spirit so as to check the transition of all things sinful upon Jesus as a matter of fact, this then is no less a miracle than the procreation through the Holy Ghost. But why are we to consider the wonders in a manner different from that in which the Spirit of God was pleased of revealing it to us?

not invisible. The possibility of their becoming visible lies in the nature of spirit itself, whose innate energy must necessarily make itself visible. Realised, however, this possibility becomes according to the dispensation of God only there, wherever it tends to the salvation of men, and hence for instructive purposes. The appearances of angels, like other anusia, tend to prove to man the certainty of his being guided by the will of God, in order to deliver him from those errors which he is personally subject to. Herein consists the main importance which they possess in the divine economy. Yet, compared with other forms of divine communication, they assume a subordinate character. For the ministry of angels refers chiefly to the physical portion of man's existence; they are the living pillars and moving agents of the world, who have been replaced by natural powers agreeably to the modern mechanical view of the world; while the religious ethical world is the theatre of the ministry of the divine Spirit. From this it will appear clear, why to one an angel appears, sometimes in a dream and sometimes. in waking, and why to another the Lord himself appears; arbitrariness must here be left out of the question; on the contrary, the various forms of revelation are in proportion to the viewing powers of those for whom they are destined. Communication by visions evidently manifests itself as the lowest degree of divine revelation; it is, so to speak, a divine revelation manifested in a state of unconsciousness; we see it bestowed on Joseph, in whom, according to the Gospel-history, there is › defined spiritual character. Through appearances of angels seen in a state of waking, the same becomes capable to receive inwardly the revelation through the word (this is the usual form of receiving the inspirations from on high by Moses and the prophets). The highest degree of revelation is the appearance of Jehovah himself, the angel xar' ¿çox, which was the privilege of the greatest saints only, of an Abraham, Jacob, Moses, and Paul. The church of Christ no longer requires the appearances of angels, since she possesses, in the Holy Ghost bestowed on her, the source itself of all truth. The form in which angels appear (with wings, or clad in garments, and such like) must be considered as merely accidental, occasioned solely by those circumstances under which the appearance takes place. However, on the part of him who beholds angels, the opening of the internal eye is always a condition. Appearances emanating from the heavenly world can

E