The Return from Egypt and Settlement in Nazareth (BNTC Commentary)
Mat 2:19-23
Mat_2:19-20. Now when Herod was dead… It would seem that the holy family had not been in Egypt very long before Herod died. Josephus in great detail relates the events that transpired during the king’s final illness. Since at that time pathology and diagnosis were still in their infancy, it would be rather risky to express in modern terminology the disease or, perhaps better, complication of diseases, that caused the tyrant’s death. Some remind us of the fact that he had been an enthusiastic athlete, and surmise that cardiac hypertension had something to do with his demise. In close connection with this, others have described his illness as a very advanced case of arteriosclerosis. Some speak of heart disease and dropsy due to malfunctioning of the kidneys. Cirrhosis of the liver has also been mentioned. Josephus, in enumerating the symptoms, speaks of ulcerated entrails, a putrified and maggoty scrotum, foul breath, constant convulsions, etc. Neither physicians nor warm baths led to recovery.
Shortly before his death the king, realizing how intensely he was hated by the Jews, and that the public announcement of his death would be greeted with jubilation, had issued an order that “all the principal men of the entire Jewish nation” should be called to him. At his command as many as came were imprisoned in the Jericho hyppodrome. He then told his fraudulent sister Salome and her husband Alexas that what most troubled him was that he would die without being mourned, and that they must therefore see to it that at his death the imprisoned leaders would all be slaughtered, so that there would indeed be mourning, if not for, at least at, his death. This was agreed on. Once dead, however, Herod’s ability to implement the pact also ceased, so that the massacre did not occur.
Antipater, Herod’s oldest son, offspring by his wife Doris (see chart on p. 189), had complained to his mother that Herod was stretching out his earthly existence so long that he, Antipater, would be an old man before coming to power. Subsequently testimony was secured according to which Antipater had been deeply involved in a plot to have his father poisoned. Given a court trial, he denied the charge but was convicted. Salome urged her brother to have Antipater executed. Rome gave its permission. All this happened when Herod was approaching death. In the midst of his family troubles, physical agonies, and mental tortures, Herod suddenly threatened to kill himself with the knife with which he was paring an apple. An alert cousin, seeing what was about to happen, prevented it. The cousin’s loud outcry, echoing through the palace, had however been misinterpreted to mean that Herod was actually dead. Antipater, hearing the news and believing that it was true, grew bold and tried to bribe the jailer to release him, promising huge rewards. The dying king was informed about this and ordered his son’s immediate execution. The command was carried out. Thus Herod added another son to the list of his own offspring whose execution he ordered. Five days later he himself expired.
Archelaus, offspring of Herod and Malthace (see chart on p. 189), saw to it that his father received a gorgeous funeral. His corpse was wrapped in purple. Upon his head had been placed a crown of gold, in his hand a scepter. The bier on which his body rested was of solid gold, lined with precious stones. Five hundred slaves bore perfumes. Along the track leading across the desert from Bethlehem to Jericho the solitary ruin of Herodeion, the place of burial, is still visible.
Josephus sums up Herod’s life in these words: “He was a man of great barbarity toward all men equally, and a slave to his passion.”
The text continues: (Now when Herod was dead) what happened? An angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream in Egypt, saying, Get up, take the little child and his mother. So far, except for the phrase “in Egypt,” here added, the sentence is identical with that in Mat_2:13. In the middle of that verse the angel had promised that he would return when the time had arrived for Joseph to leave Egypt. That promise is now being fulfilled. With respect to dreams as a means of revelation see on Mat_2:12. There follows: and go to the land of Israel, for those who were seeking the little child’s life are dead. Herod was dead. Let Joseph regard all others who might wish to kill the child also dead. Note the very general character of this command: Joseph is not told where to go in the land of Israel. That revelation will come a little later (in verse Mat_2:22). Continued: Mat_2:21. So he got up and took the little child and his mother and came into the land of Israel. As always Joseph obeys. Arrived in the land of Israel, he probably intended to settle in Bethlehem, where before his flight to Egypt he must have found many friends and relatives and an opportunity to work. Probably, too, he and Mary decided on this because of their child. Was not nearby Jerusalem “the holy city,” the center of Jewish religious life, and did not the temple stand here? Something happens, however, that changes Joseph’s plans: Mat_2:22. But when he heard that Archelaus was now ruling over Judea in the place of his father Herod, he was afraid to go there, and having been warned in a dream, he withdrew to the region of Galilee.
In order to understand this verse it must be borne in mind that before his death King Herod the Great had made a will which he changed several times. The terms of the final revision were by the Roman government allowed to be carried out. Thus it had come about that at the father’s death Herod Antipas, a son by Malthace, became tetrarch of Galilee and Perea; Archelaus, another son by the same wife, was made ethnarch of Judea, Samaria, and Idumea; and Philip, a son by Cleopatra of Jerusalem (not to be confused with the far more widely known Cleopatra of Egypt) became tetrarch of the northern territories: Iturea, Trachonitis, Gaulanitis, Auranitis, and Batanea. The titles: king, ethnarch, and tetrarch, are in this sentence mentioned in the descending order of authority and prestige.
When Joseph heard that Archelaus was now ruling over Judea in the place of his father he was afraid to settle there. The reason for this fear will become clear from the following. While still alive Herod the Great had ordered a huge golden eagle to be erected over the great gate of the temple. To the Jews who took their religion seriously this was an abomination because: a. it was a violation of Exo_20:4, as they interpreted it; and b. it was the more repulsive because of the prominence accorded to that bird by the Romans. Roman soldiers bore on their standards images of the imperial eagle. In their temples such images were also displayed. To Greeks and Romans alike was there not a close relation between Zeus=Jupiter and the eagle, in some sense making the latter a partaker of divinity?
Two famous Jewish teachers, Judas and Matthias, men regarded by all pious Jews as experts in the law of God, encouraged their students to destroy this eagle above the temple gate. Some of these young men were eager to comply, no matter what the cost might be to them. At midday they climbed upon the temple’s roof and started to pull down the eagle and to cut it to pieces with their axes. The young men were arrested and brought before Herod. To avoid an insurrection in Jerusalem the ailing king sent them to Jericho for trial. The grievously afflicted king went there himself also. The young men received mild punishment but their teachers were executed and given a dishonorable burial. Herod the Great died. Then, at Passover time, a great rebellion broke out in Jerusalem because of the murder of these two beloved teachers of the law. Archelaus, who was now the ruler, seems to have inherited his father’s nature. He used a very harsh method to quell the rebellion, killing about three thousand people, among them many pilgrims visiting Jerusalem to attend the feast.
Before we leave Archelaus it should be mentioned that even after Joseph withdrew to Galilee, Archelaus continued to be a cruel king. As a result the Judean and Samaritan leaders complained to Rome, and the ethnarch was deposed in the ninth year of his reign (A.D. 6). In his place Rome then appointed “governors.” The most widely known of these, Pontius Pilate, was the one who sentenced Jesus to be crucified (Mat_27:2, Mat_27:26).
This cruelty of Archelaus explains why Joseph had second thoughts about settling in Judea. Nevertheless, as mentioned in the preceding, Bethlehem as a place to live continued to appeal to him. It was probably hard for him to come to a definite decision. His hesitancy is removed in a dream. This time there was no angel as in his three earlier dream experiences. In the present dream he is instructed to go to Galilee. He obeys.
Continued: Mat_2:23. Having arrived there he settled in a town called Nazareth, that what was spoken through the prophets might be fulfilled, for he [Jesus] would be called a Nazarene. This can be paraphrased as follows: “Arrived in Galilee Joseph, of his own accord, yet under the direction of divine providence, returned to the place of his former residence, Nazareth (Luk_2:4), for in this act of going to Nazareth to live an Old Testament prediction was fulfilled, namely, that the Messiah would be despised and rejected of men. Nazareth was esteemed of small account, and so were its citizens, the Nazarenes.” That the Old Testament does indeed predict the Messiah’s low estate and his rejection by men is clear from some or all of the following passages: Psa_22:6-8, Psa_22:13; Psa_69:8, Psa_69:20-21; Isa_11:1; Isa_49:7; Isa_53:2-3, Isa_53:8; Dan_9:26. That during his sojourn on earth Jesus was known as the man from despised Nazareth and not as a Bethlehemite is evident from such passages as Joh_1:45-46; Joh_7:42. He was, indeed, “scorned and abhorred by men” (Mat_12:24; Mat_27:21-23, Mat_27:63; Luk_23:11; Joh_1:11; Joh_5:18; Joh_6:66; Joh_9:22, Joh_9:24), as were his followers, the Nazarenes (Act_24:5).
Here again, therefore, there was a definite fulfilment of prophecy; not, however, of one particular passage, but of “the prophets” in general.
When we compare Matthew’s nativity account with that of Luke we can hardly fail to see the sublime harmony in the two inspired records. Matthew shows how it was that Christ’s birth in Bethlehem was gradually forgotten. Herod’s act of murder had brought the holy family to Egypt and afterward to Nazareth. So Matthew relates that Jesus, though born in Bethlehem (Mat_2:1), was called a Nazarene (Mat_2:23; Mat_21:11; Mat_26:71; Joh_1:45-46; Joh_7:42). Luke, on the other hand, brings out that Jesus, though brought up in Nazareth (Luk_2:4, Luk_2:51), was born in Bethlehem (Luk_2:4, Luk_2:7). Both places (Bethlehem and Nazareth) combine in showing that Jesus is indeed the Christ of prophecy (Mat_2:5-6; Mat_2:23).
Stumble Upon
Del.icio.us
Buzz