Why is it important to read the Holy Gospel at home and how to do it correctly? Gospel of Matthew. Translation and comments by S. Averintsev
Comments on Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION TO THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW
SYNOPTIC GOSPEL
The gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke are commonly referred to as synoptic gospels. synoptic comes from two Greek words that mean see together. Therefore, the above-mentioned Gospels received this name because they describe the same events from the life of Jesus. In each of them, however, there are some additions, or something is omitted, but, in general, they are based on the same material, and this material is also located in the same way. Therefore, they can be written in parallel columns and compared with each other.
After that, it becomes quite obvious that they are very close to each other. If, for example, we compare the story of the feeding of five thousand (Matt. 14:12-21; Mark. 6:30-44; Luke 5.17-26), it is the same story told in almost the same words.
Or take, for example, another story about the healing of a paralyzed (Matt. 9:1-8; Mark. 2:1-12; Luke 5:17-26). These three stories are so similar to each other that even the introductory words, "he said to the paralytic", are in all three stories in the same form in the same place. The correspondences between all three gospels are so close that one has to either conclude that all three took material from the same source, or two based on a third.
FIRST GOSPEL
Studying the matter more carefully, one can imagine that the Gospel of Mark was written first, and the other two - the Gospel of Matthew and the Gospel of Luke - are based on it.
The Gospel of Mark can be divided into 105 passages, of which 93 occur in Matthew and 81 in Luke. Only four of the 105 passages in Mark are found in neither Matthew nor Luke. There are 661 verses in the Gospel of Mark, 1068 verses in the Gospel of Matthew, and 1149 verses in the Gospel of Luke. At least 606 verses from Mark are given in the Gospel of Matthew, and 320 in the Gospel of Luke. Of the 55 verses of the Gospel of Mark, which not reproduced in Matthew, 31 yet reproduced in Luke; thus, only 24 verses from Mark are not reproduced in either Matthew or Luke.
But not only the meaning of the verses is conveyed: Matthew uses 51%, and Luke uses 53% of the words of the Gospel of Mark. Both Matthew and Luke follow, as a rule, the arrangement of material and events adopted in the Gospel of Mark. Sometimes there are differences in Matthew or Luke from the Gospel of Mark, but they are never both were different from him. One of them always follows the order that Mark follows.
IMPROVEMENT OF THE GOSPEL FROM MARK
In view of the fact that the Gospels of Matthew and Luke are much larger than the Gospel of Mark, one might think that the Gospel of Mark is a summary of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke. But one fact indicates that the Gospel of Mark is the earliest of them all: if I may say so, the authors of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke improve on the Gospel of Mark. Let's take a few examples.
Here are three descriptions of the same event:
Map. 1.34:"And He healed many suffering from various diseases; expelled many demons."
Mat. 8.16:"He cast out the spirits with a word and healed all sick."
Onion. 4.40:"He laying on everyone of them hands, healed
Or take another example:
Map. 3:10: "For many he healed."
Mat. 12:15: "He healed them all."
Onion. 6:19: "...power went out from him and healed them all."
Approximately the same change is noted in the description of Jesus' visit to Nazareth. Compare this description in the Gospels of Matthew and Mark:
Map. 6:5-6: "And he could do no miracle there... and marveled at their unbelief."
Mat. 13:58: "And he did not do many miracles there because of their unbelief."
The author of the Gospel of Matthew does not have the heart to say that Jesus could not perform miracles, and he changes the phrase. Sometimes the writers of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke omit little allusions from the Gospel of Mark that might somehow belittle the greatness of Jesus. The gospels of Matthew and Luke omit three remarks found in the gospel of Mark:
Map. 3.5:"And looking at them with anger, grieving for the hardness of their hearts..."
Map. 3.21:"And when his neighbors heard him, they went to take him, for they said that he had lost his temper."
Map. 10.14:"Jesus was indignant..."
All this clearly shows that the Gospel of Mark was written before the others. It gave a simple, lively, and direct account, and the writers of Matthew and Luke were already beginning to be influenced by dogmatic and theological considerations, and therefore chose their words more carefully.
TEACHINGS OF JESUS
We have already seen that there are 1068 verses in Matthew and 1149 verses in Luke, and that 582 of them are repetitions of verses from the Gospel of Mark. This means that there is much more material in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke than in the Gospel of Mark. A study of this material shows that more than 200 verses from it are almost identical in the authors of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke; For example, passages such as Onion. 6.41.42 And Mat. 7.3.5; Onion. 10.21.22 And Mat. 11.25-27; Onion. 3.7-9 And Mat. 3, 7-10 almost exactly the same. But here is where we see the difference: the material that the writers of Matthew and Luke took from the Gospel of Mark deals almost exclusively with events in the life of Jesus, and these additional 200 verses, common to the Gospels of Matthew and Luke, do not concern that Jesus did, but that he said. It is quite obvious that in this part the authors of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke drew information from the same source - from the book of sayings of Jesus.
This book no longer exists, but theologians called it KB, What does Quelle mean in German? source. In those days, this book must have been extremely important, because it was the first anthology on the teachings of Jesus.
THE PLACE OF THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW IN THE GOSPEL TRADITION
Here we come to the problem of Matthew the apostle. Theologians agree that the first gospel is not the fruit of Matthew's hands. A person who witnessed the life of Christ would not need to turn to the Gospel of Mark as a source of information about the life of Jesus, as does the author of the Gospel of Matthew. But one of the first church historians named Papias, Bishop of Hierapolis, left us the following extremely important news: "Matthew collected the sayings of Jesus in Hebrew."
Thus, we can consider that it was Matthew who wrote the book from which all people should draw as a source if they want to know what Jesus taught. It is because so much of this source book was included in the first gospel that it was given the name Matthew. We should be eternally grateful to Matthew when we remember that we owe him the Sermon on the Mount and almost everything we know about the teachings of Jesus. In other words, we owe our knowledge of the life events Jesus, and Matthew - the knowledge of the essence teachings Jesus.
MATTHEW-COLLECTOR
We know very little about Matthew himself. IN Mat. 9.9 we read about his calling. We know that he was a publican - a tax collector - and therefore everyone must have hated him terribly, because the Jews hated their fellow tribesmen who served the conquerors. Matthew must have been a traitor in their eyes.
But Matthew had one gift. Most of Jesus' disciples were fishermen and had no talent for putting words on paper, and Matthew must have been an expert in this business. When Jesus called Matthew, who was sitting at the tax office, he got up and, leaving everything but his pen, followed Him. Matthew used his literary talent nobly and became the first person to describe the teachings of Jesus.
GOSPEL OF THE JEWS
Let us now look at the main features of the Gospel of Matthew, in order to pay attention to this when reading it.
First and foremost, the Gospel of Matthew it is a gospel written for the Jews. It was written by a Jew to convert the Jews.
One of the main purposes of the Gospel of Matthew was to show that in Jesus all Old Testament prophecies were fulfilled and therefore He must be the Messiah. One phrase, a recurring theme, runs through the entire book: "It came to pass that God spoke through a prophet." This phrase is repeated in the Gospel of Matthew at least 16 times. Birth of Jesus and His Name - Fulfillment of Prophecy (1, 21-23); as well as the flight to Egypt (2,14.15); massacre of the innocents (2,16-18); Settlement of Joseph in Nazareth and education of Jesus there (2,23); the very fact that Jesus spoke in parables (13,34.35); triumphal entry into Jerusalem (21,3-5); betrayal for thirty pieces of silver (27,9); and casting lots for the garments of Jesus as He hung on the Cross (27,35). The author of the Gospel of Matthew set as his main goal to show that the Old Testament prophecies were embodied in Jesus, that every detail of the life of Jesus was foretold by the prophets, and, thereby, to convince the Jews and force them to recognize Jesus as the Messiah.
The interest of the author of the Gospel of Matthew is directed primarily to the Jews. Their conversion is nearer and dearer to his heart. To a Canaanite woman who turned to Him for help, Jesus first replied: "I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel" (15,24). Sending the twelve apostles to proclaim the good news, Jesus said to them: "Do not go to the way of the Gentiles, and do not enter the city of the Samaritans, but rather go to the lost sheep of the house of Israel" (10, 5.6). But one must not think that this gospel excludes the Gentiles in every possible way. Many will come from the east and the west and lie down with Abraham in the Kingdom of Heaven (8,11). "And the gospel of the kingdom will be preached throughout the whole world" (24,14). And it is in the Gospel of Matthew that the Church is given the order to go on a campaign: "Go, therefore, make disciples of all the nations." (28,19). It is, of course, obvious that the author of the Gospel of Matthew is primarily interested in the Jews, but he foresees the day when all the nations will gather.
The Jewish origin and Jewish focus of the Gospel of Matthew is also evident in its relationship to the law. Jesus did not come to destroy the law, but to fulfill it. Even the smallest part of the law will not pass. Don't teach people to break the law. The righteousness of the Christian must surpass the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees (5, 17-20). The Gospel of Matthew was written by a man who knew and loved the law, and who saw that it has a place in Christian teaching. In addition, it should be noted the obvious paradox in relation to the author of the Gospel of Matthew to the scribes and Pharisees. He recognizes special powers for them: "The scribes and Pharisees sat on the seat of Moses; therefore, whatever they tell you to observe, observe and do" (23,2.3). But in no other gospel are they condemned so strictly and consistently as in Matthew.
Already at the very beginning we see the merciless exposure of the Sadducees and Pharisees by John the Baptist, who called them the offspring of vipers. (3, 7-12). They complain that Jesus eats and drinks with publicans and sinners (9,11); they claimed that Jesus cast out demons not by God's power, but by the power of the prince of demons (12,24). They plot to destroy him (12,14); Jesus warns the disciples not to beware of the leaven of bread, but of the teachings of the Pharisees and Sadducees (16,12); they are like plants that will be uprooted (15,13); they can't see the signs of the times (16,3); they are the killers of the prophets (21,41). In the whole New Testament there is no other chapter like Mat. 23, which condemns not what the scribes and Pharisees teach, but their behavior and way of life. The author condemns them because they do not at all correspond to the doctrine that they preach, and do not at all achieve the ideal established by them and for them.
The author of the Gospel of Matthew is also very interested in the Church. Of all the synoptic gospels, the word Church found only in the Gospel of Matthew. Only in the Gospel of Matthew is there a passage about the Church after Peter's confession in Caesarea Philippi (Matt. 16:13-23; cf. Mark 8:27-33; Luke 9:18-22). Only Matthew says that disputes should be decided by the Church (18,17). By the time the Gospel of Matthew was written, the Church had become a large organization and indeed a major factor in the lives of Christians.
In the Gospel of Matthew, an interest in the apocalyptic was especially reflected; in other words, to what Jesus said about His Second Coming, about the end of the world and the Day of Judgment. IN Mat. 24 a far fuller account of the apocalyptic discourses of Jesus is given than in any other gospel. Only in the Gospel of Matthew is there a parable about the talents (25,14-30); about the wise and foolish virgins (25, 1-13); about sheep and goats (25,31-46). Matthew had a special interest in the end times and the Day of Judgment.
But this is not the most important feature of the Gospel of Matthew. This is a highly inclusive gospel.
We have already seen that it was the Apostle Matthew who gathered the first assembly and compiled an anthology of Jesus' teachings. Matthew was a great systematizer. He collected in one place everything he knew about the teachings of Jesus on this or that issue, and therefore we find in the Gospel of Matthew five large complexes in which the teachings of Christ are collected and systematized. All these five complexes are connected with the Kingdom of God. Here they are:
a) The Sermon on the Mount or the Law of the Kingdom (5-7)
b) Duty of Kingdom Leaders (10)
c) Parables of the Kingdom (13)
d) Majesty and Forgiveness In the Kingdom (18)
e) The Coming of the King (24,25)
But Matthew not only collected and systematized. It must be remembered that he wrote in an era when there was no printing yet, when books were few and rare, because they had to be copied by hand. At such a time, relatively few people had books, and therefore, if they wanted to know and use the story of Jesus, they had to memorize it.
Therefore, Matthew always arranges the material in such a way that it is easy for the reader to remember it. He arranges the material in triplets and sevens: three messages of Joseph, three denials of Peter, three questions of Pontius Pilate, seven parables about the Kingdom in chapter 13, seven times "woe to you" to the Pharisees and scribes in chapter 23.
A good example of this is the genealogy of Jesus, which opens the gospel. The purpose of the genealogy is to prove that Jesus is the son of David. There are no numbers in Hebrew, they are symbolized by letters; moreover, in Hebrew there are no signs (letters) for vowel sounds. David in Hebrew will be respectively DVD; if these are taken as numbers and not as letters, they add up to 14, and the genealogy of Jesus consists of three groups of names, each with fourteen names. Matthew goes to great lengths to arrange the teaching of Jesus in such a way that people can absorb and remember it.
Every teacher should be grateful to Matthew, because what he wrote is, first of all, the gospel for teaching people.
The Gospel of Matthew has another feature: dominant in it is the thought of Jesus the King. The author writes this gospel to show the royalty and royal lineage of Jesus.
The bloodline must prove from the very beginning that Jesus is the son of King David (1,1-17). This title Son of David is used in the Gospel of Matthew more than in any other Gospel. (15,22; 21,9.15). Magi came to see the King of the Jews (2,2); Jesus' triumphal entry into Jerusalem is a deliberately dramatized statement by Jesus of His rights as King (21,1-11). Before Pontius Pilate, Jesus consciously assumes the title of king (27,11). Even on the Cross above His head stands, albeit mockingly, the royal title (27,37). In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus quotes the law and then refutes it with royal words: "But I tell you..." (5,22. 28.34.39.44). Jesus declares: "All authority has been given to me" (28,18).
In the Gospel of Matthew we see Jesus the Man, born to be King. Jesus walks through its pages, as if dressed in royal purple and gold.
MATTHEW GOSPEL (Matt. 1:1-17)
It may seem to the modern reader that Matthew chose a very strange beginning for his gospel, putting in the first chapter a long list of names through which the reader will have to wade. But for a Jew, this was completely natural and, from his point of view, it was the most correct way to start a story about a person's life.
The Jews were extremely interested in genealogies. Matthew calls it genealogical book - byblos geneseus- Jesus Christ. In the Old Testament, we often find genealogies of famous people. (Gen. 5:1; 10:1; 11:10; 11:27). When the great Jewish historian Josephus wrote his biography, he began it with a genealogy he said he found in the archives.
Interest in genealogies was due to the fact that the Jews attached great importance to the purity of their origin. A person whose blood contained the slightest admixture of someone else's blood was deprived of the right to be called a Jew and a member of God's chosen people. So, for example, the priest had to present a complete, without any omissions, list of his genealogy from Aaron himself, and if he married, then his wife had to present her genealogy at least five generations ago. When Ezra made a change in worship after the return of Israel from exile and established the priesthood again, the sons of Habaiah, the sons of Gakkoz and the sons of Behrzell were excluded from the priesthood and were called unclean, because "they were looking for their genealogy record and it was not found" (Ezra 2:62).
The genealogical archives were kept in the Sanhedrin. Purebred Jews always despised King Herod the Great because he was half Edomite.
This passage in Matthew may seem uninteresting, but it was extremely important to the Jews that Jesus' lineage could be traced back to Abraham.
In addition, it should be noted that this pedigree is very carefully compiled into three groups of fourteen people each. This arrangement is called mnemonics, that is, arranged in such a way that it is easier to remember. It must always be remembered that the Gospels were written hundreds of years before printed books appeared, and only a few people could have copies of them, and therefore, in order to own them, they had to be memorized. And so the pedigree is compiled so that it is easy to remember. It was meant to prove that Jesus was the Son of David, and was designed to be easy to remember.
THREE STAGES (Mat. 1:1-17 continued)
The very location of the pedigree is very symbolic for all human life. The genealogy is divided into three parts, each of which corresponds to one of the great stages in the history of Israel.
The first part covers the history up to King David. David rallied Israel into a nation and made Israel a strong power to be reckoned with in the world. The first part covers the history of Israel until the advent of its greatest king.
The second part covers the period before the Babylonian captivity. This part speaks of the shame of the people, of their tragedy and misfortune.
The third part covers the history before Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ freed people from slavery, saved them from grief, and in Him tragedy turned into victory.
These three parts symbolize three stages in the spiritual history of mankind.
1. Man was born for greatness."God created man in His own image and likeness, in the image of God He created him (Gen. 1:27). God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness" (Gen. 1:26). Man was created in the image of God. Man was meant to be in friendship with God. He was created to be related to God. As the great Roman thinker Cicero saw it: "The difference between man and God comes down only to time." The man was essentially born to be a king.
2. Man has lost his greatness. Instead of being a servant of God, man became a slave to sin. As the English writer G.K. Chesterton: "What is true about man, however, is that he is not at all what he was meant to be." Man used his free will to show open defiance and disobedience to God, instead of entering into friendship and companionship with Him. Left to his own devices, man nullified God's plan in His creation.
3. Man can regain his greatness. Even after that, God did not leave man to the mercy of fate and his vices. God did not allow man to ruin himself with his recklessness, did not allow everything to end in tragedy. God sent His Son, Jesus Christ, into this world so that He would save man from the quagmire of sin in which he was mired, and free him from the chains of sin with which he bound himself, so that man could through Him gain the friendship he had lost with God.
In the genealogy of Jesus Christ, Matthew shows us the newfound royal greatness, the tragedy of lost freedom, and the glory of freedom returned. And this, by the grace of God, is the history of mankind and every person.
THE REALIZATION OF HUMAN DREAMS (Mat. 1.1-17 (continued))
This passage highlights two characteristics of Jesus.
1. It is emphasized here that Jesus is the Son of David; genealogy and was compiled mainly in order to prove this.
Peter emphasizes this in the first recorded sermon of the Christian Church. (Acts 2:29-36). Paul speaks of Jesus Christ, born of the seed of David according to the flesh (Rom. 1:3). Pastoral writer urges people to remember Jesus Christ from the seed of David who rose from the dead (2 Tim. 2:8). The Revelator hears the Risen Christ say, "I am the root and offspring of David" (Rev. 22:16).
This is how Jesus is repeatedly referred to in the gospel story. After the demon-possessed blind and dumb was healed, the people said: "Is this the Christ, the Son of David?" (Matt. 12:23). A woman from Tire and Sidon, who sought Jesus' help for her daughter, addresses Him: "Son of David!" (Matt. 15:22). The blind cried out: "Have mercy on us, Lord, Son of David!" (Matthew 20:30-31). And as the Son of David is greeted by the crowd as he enters Jerusalem for the last time (Mat 21:9-15).
It is very important that Jesus was so greeted by the crowd. The Jews were expecting something unusual; they never forgot and could never forget that they are God's chosen people. Although their whole history was a long chain of defeats and misfortunes, although they were a captive conquered people, they never forgot the fate of their destiny. And the common people dreamed that a descendant of King David would come into this world and lead them to glory, which, as they believed, was theirs by right.
In other words, Jesus was the answer to people's dream. People, however, see only answers to their dreams of power, wealth, material abundance and in the implementation of the ambitious plans they cherish. But if man's dreams of peace and beauty, greatness and satisfaction are ever to be realized, they can only find fulfillment in Jesus Christ.
Jesus Christ and the life He offers people is the answer to people's dream. There is a passage in the story about Joseph that goes far beyond the scope of the story itself. Together with Joseph, the chief court cupbearer and the chief court baker-baker were also in prison. They had dreams that disturbed them, and they cried out in horror: "We have seen dreams, but there is no one to interpret them" (Genesis 40:8). Just because a person is a person, he is always haunted by a dream, and its realization lies in Jesus Christ.
2. This passage emphasizes that Jesus is the fulfillment of all prophecy: in him the message of the prophets was fulfilled. Today we do not take much account of prophecy, and for the most part we are unwilling to look in the Old Testament for statements that have come true in the New Testament. But there is a great and eternal truth in the prophecy that this universe has a purpose and a purpose for it, and God wants to fulfill His specific purposes in it.
One play tells of a terrible famine in Ireland in the nineteenth century. Finding nothing better and not knowing any other solution, the government sent people to dig roads for which there was no need, in a completely unknown direction. One of the heroes of the play, Michael, having learned about this, left his job and, returning home, said to his father: "They are making a road leading to nowhere."
A person who believes in prophecy would never say such a thing. History cannot be a road that leads nowhere. We may have a different view of prophecy than our ancestors did, but behind prophecy is the enduring fact that life and peace are not a road to nowhere, but a path to God's purpose.
NOT RIGHTEOUS, BUT SINNERS (Matt. 1:1-17 (continued))
The most striking in the pedigree are the names of the women. In Jewish genealogies, female names are extremely rare in general. The woman had no legal rights; they looked at her not as a person, but as a thing; she was only the property of the father or husband, and they could do with it what they pleased. In everyday morning prayer, the Jew thanked God that He did not make him a pagan, a slave or a woman. In general, the very existence of these names in the pedigree is an extremely surprising and unusual phenomenon.
But if you look at these women - who they were and what they did - you have to wonder even more. Rahab, or Rahab as she is called in the Old Testament, was a harlot from Jericho (Josh. N. 2:1-7). Ruth was not even a Jewess, but a Moabite (Ruth 1:4), and doesn't the law say, "The Ammonite and the Moabite cannot enter into the congregation of the Lord, and the tenth generation of them cannot enter into the congregation of the Lord forever" (Deut. 23:3). Ruth was from a hostile and hated people. Tamar was a skilled seductress (Gen. 38). Bathsheba, the mother of Solomon, was taken by David most cruelly from Uriah, her husband (2 Sam. 11 and 12). If Matthew had searched the Old Testament for improbable candidates, he could not have found four more impossible ancestors for Jesus Christ. But, of course, there is something very remarkable in this. Here, at the very beginning, Matthew shows us in symbols the essence of the gospel of God in Jesus Christ, because here he shows how barriers come down.
1. The barrier between Jew and Gentile has disappeared. Rahab - a woman from Jericho, and Ruth - a Moabite - found a place in the genealogy of Jesus Christ. This already reflected the truth that in Christ there is neither Jew nor Greek. Already here one can see the universalism of the gospel and the love of God.
2. Barriers between women and men have disappeared. There were no female names in the regular genealogy, but there are in the Jesus genealogy. The old contempt is gone; men and women are equally dear to God and equally important to His purposes.
3. The barriers between saints and sinners have disappeared. God can use for His purposes and fit into His plan even someone who has sinned a lot. "I came," says Jesus, "to call not the righteous, but sinners" (Matt. 9:13).
Already here at the very beginning of the Gospel there are indications of the all-encompassing love of God. God can find His servants among those that respected Orthodox Jews would turn away with a shudder.
THE SAVIOR'S ENTRY INTO THE WORLD (Matt. 1:18-25)
Such relationships can confuse us. First, it talks about betrothal Mary, then about what Joseph wanted secretly let go her, and then she is named wife his. But these relationships reflect the usual Jewish marriage relationship and the procedure, which consisted of several stages.
1. First, matchmaking. It was often done in childhood; this was done by parents or professional matchmakers and matchmakers, and very often the future spouses did not even see each other. Marriage was considered too serious a matter to be left to the impulse of human hearts.
2. Second, betrothal. Betrothal can be called a confirmation of the matchmaking concluded between the couple earlier. At this point, the matchmaking could be interrupted at the request of the girl. If the engagement took place, then it lasted one year, during which the couple was known to everyone as husband and wife, although without marriage rights. The only way to end the relationship was through divorce. In Jewish law, one can often find a phrase that seems strange to us: a girl whose fiancé died during this time was called a "virgin widow." Joseph and Mary were engaged, and if Joseph wanted to end the engagement, he could only do so by giving Mary a divorce.
3. And the third stage - marriage, after a year of engagement.
If we recall the Jewish customs of marriage, it becomes clear that this passage describes the most typical and normal relationship.
Thus, before the marriage, Joseph was told that the Virgin Mary from the Holy Spirit would give birth to a baby who was to be called Jesus. Jesus - is the Greek translation of the Hebrew name Yeshua and Yeshua means Yahweh will save. Even the psalmist David exclaimed: "He will deliver Israel from all their iniquities" (Ps. 129:8). Joseph was also told that the Child would grow up to be a Savior who would save God's people from their sins. Jesus was born as a Savior rather than as a King. He came into this world not for His own sake, but for the sake of people and for our salvation.
BORN OF THE HOLY SPIRIT (Matt. 1:18-25 (continued))
This passage says that Jesus will be born of the Holy Spirit in an immaculate conception. The fact of the virgin birth is difficult for us to understand. There are many theories trying to figure out the literal physical meaning of this phenomenon. We want to understand what is the main thing for us in this truth.
When we read this passage with fresh eyes, we see that it emphasizes not so much the fact that a virgin gave birth to Jesus, but rather that the birth of Jesus is the result of the work of the Holy Spirit. "It turned out that She (Virgin Mary) is pregnant with the Holy Spirit." "What's born in her is from the Holy Spirit." And what does it mean then the phrase that at the birth of Jesus the Holy Spirit took a special part?
According to the Jewish worldview, the Holy Spirit had certain functions. We cannot invest in this passage in its entirety. Christian ideas of the Holy Spirit, since Joseph could not yet know anything about it, and therefore we must interpret it in the light of Jewish ideas of the Holy Spirit, for Joseph would have put that very idea into the passage, because he only knew it.
1. According to the Jewish worldview The Holy Spirit brought God's truth to the people. The Holy Spirit taught the prophets what they needed to say; The Holy Spirit taught the people of God what they should do; throughout the ages and generations, the Holy Spirit has brought God's truth to people. Therefore, Jesus is the One who brings God's truth to people.
Let's say it differently. Jesus alone can tell us what God is like and what God would like us to be. Only in Jesus do we see what God is like and what man should be. Until Jesus came, people had only vague and unclear, and often completely wrong ideas about God. They could at best guess and grope; and Jesus could say, "He who has seen me has seen the Father" (John 14:9). In Jesus, as nowhere else in the world, we see love, compassion, mercy, a searching heart and the purity of God. With the coming of Jesus, the time of conjecture ended and the time of certainty came. Before the coming of Jesus, people did not know what virtue was at all. Only in Jesus do we see what true virtue, true maturity, true obedience to the will of God is. Jesus came to tell us the truth about God and the truth about ourselves.
2. The Jews believed that the Holy Spirit not only brings the truth of God to people, but also gives them the ability to know this truth when they see it. In this way, Jesus opens people's eyes to the truth. People are blinded by their own ignorance. Their prejudices lead them astray; their eyes and minds are darkened by their sins and passions. Jesus can open our eyes so we can see the truth. In one of the novels of the English writer William Locke, there is an image of a rich woman who has spent half her life seeing the sights and art galleries of the world. Eventually she got tired; nothing could surprise her, interest her. But one day she meets a man who has few material goods of this world, but who truly knows and loves beauty. They begin to travel together and everything changes for this woman. "I never knew what things were like until you showed me how to look at them," she told him.
Life becomes completely different when Jesus teaches us how to look at things. When Jesus comes into our hearts, He opens our eyes so that we can see the world and things right.
CREATION AND RE-CREATION (Matt. 1:18-25 (continued))
3. Jews in a special way associated the Holy Spirit with creation. God created the world by His Spirit. In the beginning, the Spirit of God hovered over the waters, and out of chaos the world was made. (Gen. 1,2)."By the word of the Lord the heavens were made," said the psalmist, "and by the spirit of his mouth, all their host" (Ps. 32:6).(As in Hebrew ruach, as well as in Greek pneuma, mean at the same time spirit And breath)."Send Your Spirit - they are created" (Ps. 103:30)."The Spirit of God created me," says Job, "and the breath of the Almighty gave me life" (Job 33:4).
The Spirit is the Creator of the world and the Giver of life. Thus, in Jesus Christ, the creative, life-giving and power of God came into the world. The power that brought order to the primal chaos has now come to us to bring order to our disordered lives. The power that breathed life into that which had no life has come to breathe life into our weakness and our vanity. It can be said that we are not truly alive until Jesus comes into our lives.
4. In particular, the Jews associated the Spirit not with creation and creation, but with restoration. Ezekiel has a grim picture of a field full of bones. He tells how those bones came to life, and then he hears the voice of God saying, "I will put my Spirit in you, and you will live" (Ezekiel 37:1-14). The rabbis had this saying: “God said to Israel: “In this world, My Spirit has given you wisdom, and in the future, My Spirit will give you life again.” The Spirit of God can awaken to life people who have died in sin and deafness.
Thus, through Jesus Christ, a power came into the world that could recreate life. Jesus can revive a soul lost in sin; He can revive dead ideals; He can again give strength to the fallen to strive for virtue. He can renew life when people have lost everything that life means.
So, this chapter says not only that Jesus Christ was born of a virgin. The essence of Matthew's account is that the Spirit of God was involved in the birth of Jesus as never before in the world. The Spirit brings the truth of God to the people; The Spirit enables people to know the truth when they see it; Spirit is the mediator in the creation of the world; only the Spirit can revive the human soul when it has lost the life it should have had.
Jesus gives us the ability to see what God is like and what man should be; Jesus opens the mind to understanding so that we can see God's truth for us; Jesus is a creative force that has come to people; Jesus is a recreative force capable of freeing human souls from sinful death.
Commentaries (introduction) to the entire book "From Matthew"
Comments on Chapter 1
In terms of the grandeur of the concept and the power with which the mass of material is subordinated to great ideas, not a single Scripture of the New or Old Testaments, which has a bearing on historical subjects, can be compared with the Gospel of Matthew.
Theodor Zahn
Introduction
I. SPECIAL STATEMENT IN THE CANON
The Gospel of Matthew is an excellent bridge between the Old and New Testaments. From the very first words, we return to the forefather of the Old Testament people of God, Abraham, and to the first great King David of Israel. In its emotionality, strong Jewish flavor, many quotations from the Hebrew Scriptures, and position at the head of all the books of NT Ev. Matthew is the logical place from which the Christian message to the world begins its journey.
That Matthew the publican, also called Levi, wrote the first Gospel, is ancient and universal opinion.
Since he was not a permanent member of the apostolic group, it would seem strange if the first gospel were attributed to him, when he had nothing to do with it.
Except for the ancient document known as the Didache ("Teaching of the Twelve Apostles"), Justin Martyr, Dionysius of Corinth, Theophilus of Antioch and Athenagoras the Athenian regard the Gospel as reliable. Eusebius, an ecclesiastical historian, quotes Papias as saying that "Matthew wrote "Logic" in Hebrew, and each one interprets it as best he can." Irenaeus, Pantheinus, and Origen generally agree. in the NT But what is “logic”? revelations God's. In the statement of Papias, it cannot carry such a meaning. There are three main points of view on his statement: (1) it refers to gospel from Matthew as such. That is, Matthew wrote the Aramaic version of his Gospel specifically in order to win the Jews for Christ and instruct Jewish Christians, and only later did the Greek version appear; (2) it applies only to statements Jesus, which were later transferred to his gospel; (3) it refers to "evidence", i.e. quotes from the Old Testament Scriptures to show that Jesus is the Messiah. The first and second opinions are more likely.
The Greek of Matthew does not read as an explicit translation; but such a widespread tradition (in the absence of early controversy) must have a factual basis. Tradition says that Matthew preached in Palestine for fifteen years, and then went to evangelize foreign countries. It is possible that around 45 AD. he left to the Jews, who accepted Jesus as their Messiah, the first draft of his gospel (or simply lectures about Christ) in Aramaic, and later made Greek final version for universal use. So did Joseph, a contemporary of Matthew. This Jewish historian made the first draft of his "Jewish War" in Aramaic , and then finalized the book in Greek.
Internal evidence The first gospel is very suitable for a devout Jew who loved the OT and was a gifted writer and editor. As a civil servant of Rome, Matthew had to be fluent in both languages: his people (Aramaic) and those who were in power. (The Romans used Greek in the East, not Latin.) Details of numbers, parables about money, financial terms, and expressive, correct style all fit in perfectly with his profession as a tax collector. The highly educated, non-conservative scholar perceives Matthew as the author of this gospel in part and under the influence of his convincing internal evidence.
Despite such universal external and corresponding internal evidence, most scholars reject The traditional view is that the publican Matthew wrote this book. They justify this for two reasons.
First: if count, that Ev. Mark was the first written gospel (referred to in many circles today as "gospel truth"), why would the apostle and eyewitness use so much of Mark's material? (93% of Mark's Hebrews are also found in the other Gospels.) In answer to this question, let us first say: do not proven that Ev. from Mark was written first. Ancient evidence says that the first was Ev. from Matthew, and since the first Christians were almost all Jews, this makes a lot of sense. But even if we agree with the so-called "Markovian majority" (and many conservatives do), Matthew could recognize that the work of Mark was largely influenced by the energetic Simon Peter, co-apostle Matthew, as early church traditions claim (see "Introduction "to Ev. from Mark).
The second argument against the book being written by Matthew (or another eyewitness) is the lack of vivid details. Mark, whom no one considers a witness to the ministry of Christ, has colorful details from which it can be assumed that he himself was present at this. How could an eyewitness write so dryly? Probably, the very features of the publican's character explain this very well. In order to give more space to our Lord's discourse, Levi had to give less space to unnecessary details. This would have happened to Mark if he wrote first, and Matthew saw the traits inherent in Peter directly.
III. WRITING TIME
If the widely held belief that Matthew wrote the Aramaic version of the gospel (or at least the sayings of Jesus) beforehand is correct, then the date of writing is 45 CE. e., fifteen years after the ascension, completely coincides with ancient traditions. He probably completed his more complete, canonical Greek Gospel in 50-55, and perhaps even later.
Opinion that the gospel should be written after the destruction of Jerusalem (AD 70), is based rather on disbelief in Christ's ability to predict future events in detail and other rationalistic theories that ignore or reject inspiration.
IV. PURPOSE OF WRITING AND THEME
Matthew was a young man when Jesus called him. A Jew by birth and a publican by profession, he left everything in order to follow Christ. One of the many rewards for him was that he became one of the twelve apostles. Another is his election to be the author of the work that we know as the first Gospel. It is usually believed that Matthew and Levi are the same person (Mark 2:14; Luke 5:27).
In his gospel, Matthew sets out to show that Jesus is the long-awaited Messiah of Israel, the only legitimate claimant to the throne of David.
The book does not claim to be a complete account of the life of Christ. It begins with His genealogy and childhood, then the narrative moves on to the beginning of His public ministry, when He was about thirty years old. Under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, Matthew selects aspects of the Savior's life and ministry that bear witness to Him as Anointed One God (which means the word "Messiah", or "Christ"). The book takes us to the climax of events: the suffering, death, resurrection and ascension of the Lord Jesus.
And in this culmination, of course, the foundation of man's salvation is laid.
This is why the book is called The Gospel, not so much because it paves the way for sinners to receive salvation, but because it describes the sacrificial ministry of Christ that made that salvation possible.
"Bible Commentaries for Christians" aims not to be exhaustive or technically perfect, but rather to provoke a desire to personally meditate on and study the Word. And most of all, they are aimed at creating in the heart of the reader a strong desire for the return of the King.
"And even I, burning more and more heart,
And even I, cherishing the sweet hope,
I sigh heavily, my Christ,
About the hour when you return,
Losing courage at the sight
Flaming footsteps of Your future ones.
F. W. G. Mayer ("Saint Paul")
Plan
Genealogy and the birth of the Messiah-King (CH. 1)
THE EARLY YEARS OF THE MESSIAH-KING (CH. 2)
PREPARATION FOR THE MESSIAN MINISTRY AND ITS BEGINNING (CH. 3-4)
THE ORGANIZATION OF THE KINGDOM (CH. 5-7)
MIRACLES OF GRACE AND POWER CREATED BY THE MESSIAH AND DIFFERENT REACTIONS TO THEM (8.1 - 9.34)
GROWING OPPOSITION AND REJECTION OF THE MESSIAH (CH. 11-12)
THE KING REJECTED BY ISRAEL DECLARES A NEW, INTERIM FORM OF THE KINGDOM (CH. 13)
MESSIAH'S UNTIREAUING GRACE MEETS INCREASING HOSTILITY (14:1 - 16:12)
THE KING PREPARES HIS DISCIPLES (16:13 - 17:27)
THE KING INSTRUCTS HIS DISCIPLES (CH 18-20)
INTRODUCTION AND REJECTION OF THE KING (CH. 21-23)
SPEECH OF THE KING ON THE MOUNT OF ELEON (CH. 24-25)
SUFFERING AND DEATH OF THE KING (CH. 26-27)
TRIUMPH OF THE KING (CH. 28)
I. GENERATION AND THE BIRTH OF THE MESSIAH-KING (Ch. 1)
A. Genealogy of Jesus Christ (1:1-17)
On the surface of the NT, the reader may wonder why this book begins with such a boring subject as the family tree. Someone may decide that there is nothing to worry about if this list of names is ignored and transported, bypassing it, to the place where the events began.
However, a pedigree is essential. It lays the foundation for everything that will be said next. If it cannot be shown that Jesus is a legitimate descendant of David in the royal line, then it will be impossible to prove that He is the Messiah, the King of Israel. Matthew begins his account exactly where he should have begun: with documentary evidence that Jesus inherited the legal right to the throne of David through His stepfather Joseph.
This genealogy shows the legitimate lineage of Jesus as King of Israel; in the genealogy of Ev. Luke shows His hereditary origin as the Son of David. Matthew's lineage follows the royal line from David through his
son of Solomon, the next king; Luke's genealogy is based on blood relationship through another son, Nathan. This lineage includes Joseph, who adopted Jesus; the genealogy in Luke 3 probably traces the ancestors of Mary, of whom Jesus was her own son.
A thousand years earlier, God had made an alliance with David, promising him a kingdom that would never end and an unbroken line of kings (Ps. 89:4,36,37). That covenant is now fulfilled in Christ: He is the rightful heir of David through Joseph and the true seed of David through Mary. Since He is eternal, His kingdom will endure forever and He will reign forever as the great Son of David. Jesus combined in His Person the two prerequisites necessary to claim the throne of Israel (legal and hereditary). And since He is alive now, there can be no other applicants.
1,1 -15 Wording Genealogy of Jesus Christ, Son of David, Son of Abraham corresponds to the expression from Genesis 5:1: "This is the genealogy of Adam..." Genesis presents us with the first Adam, Matthew the last Adam.
The first Adam was the head of the first, or physical, creation. Christ, as the last Adam, is the Head of the new or spiritual creation.
The subject of this gospel is Jesus Christ. The name "Jesus" represents Him as Jehovah the Savior1, the title "Christ" ("The Anointed One") - as the long-awaited Messiah of Israel. The title "Son of David" is associated with the position of Messiah and King in the OT. ("Jehovah" is the Russian form of the Hebrew name "Yahweh", which is usually translated as "Lord". The same can be said about the name "Jesus" - the Russian form of the Hebrew name "Yeshua".) The title "Son of Abraham" represents our Lord as The One who is the final fulfillment of the promise given to the progenitor of the Jewish people.
The genealogy is divided into three historical segments: from Abraham to Jesse, from David to Josiah, and from Jeconiah to Joseph. The first section leads to David, the second covers the period of the kingdom, the third period includes a list of persons of royal lineage during their stay in exile (586 BC and beyond).
There are many interesting details on this list. For example, four women are mentioned here: Tamar, Rahab, Ruth And Bathsheba (former for Uriah). Since women are rarely mentioned in Eastern genealogical records, the inclusion of these women is all the more surprising since two of them were harlots (Tamar and Rahab), one committed adultery (Bathsheba), and two were Gentiles (Rahab and Ruth).
That they are included in the introductory part of Ev. from Matthew, may be a subtle allusion to the fact that the coming of Christ will bring salvation to sinners, grace to the Gentiles, and that in Him all racial and gender barriers will be destroyed.
It is also interesting to mention the king by name Jehoiachin. In Jeremiah 22:30, God pronounced a curse on this man: "Thus says the Lord: Write this man down childless, a man unfortunate in his days, because no one of his tribe shall sit on the throne of David and rule over Judah."
If Jesus really was the son of Joseph, He would have fallen under this curse. But He still had to legally be the son of Joseph in order to inherit the right to the throne of David.
This problem was solved by the miracle of the virgin birth: through Joseph, Jesus became the legal heir to the throne. He was the true son of David through Mary. The curse of Jeconiah did not fall on Mary and her children because her lineage was not from Jeconiah.
1,16 "From which" in English can refer to both: Joseph and Mary. However, in the original Greek, this word is in the singular and in the feminine gender, thus indicating that Jesus was born from Mary, not from Joseph. But, in addition to these interesting details of the genealogy, the controversies contained in it should also be mentioned.
1,17 Matthew draws particular attention to the presence of three groups of fourteen births in each. However, we know from the OT that some names are missing from its list. For example, Ahaziah, Joash and Amaziah reigned between Jehoram and Uzziah (v. 8) (see 2 Kings 8-14; 2 Chr. 21-25). Both Matthew and Luke mention two identical names: Salafiel and Zerubbabel (Matt. 1:12; Luke 3:27). However, it is strange that the genealogies of Joseph and Mary should have a common point in these two personalities, and then diverge again. It becomes even more difficult to understand when we notice that both Gospels refer to Ezra 3:2, including Zerubbabel among the sons of Salathiel, while in 1 Chronicles 3:19 he is recorded as the son of Thedaiah.
The third difficulty is that Matthew gives twenty-seven generations from David to Jesus, while Luke gives forty-two. Despite the fact that the evangelists give different family trees, yet such a difference in the number of generations seems strange.
What position should the student of the Bible take in regard to these difficulties and seeming contradictions? First, our fundamental premise is that the Bible is the inspired Word of God, so there can be no error in it. Secondly, it is incomprehensible, because it reflects the infinity of the Divine. We can understand the fundamental truths of the Word, but we will never understand everything.
Therefore, when faced with these difficulties, we come to the conclusion that the problem is more in the lack of our knowledge, and not in biblical errors. Difficult passages should encourage us to study the Bible and look for answers. "The glory of God is to cover the work with mystery, but the glory of kings is to search the work" (Proverbs 25:2).
Careful research by historians and archaeological excavations have not been able to prove that the biblical statements are erroneous. Everything that seems difficult and contradictory to us has a reasonable explanation, and this explanation is filled with spiritual meaning and benefit.
B. Jesus Christ is born of Mary (1:18-25)
1,18 Birth of Jesus Christ different from the birth of other people mentioned in the pedigree. There we found a repeated expression: "A" gave birth to "B". But now we have a birth record without an earthly father. The facts relating to this miraculous conception are stated simply and with dignity. Maria was engaged to Joseph but the wedding has not yet taken place. In New Testament times, betrothal was a kind of engagement (but carried a greater degree of responsibility than today), and it could only be terminated by divorce. Although the betrothed couple did not live together before the marriage ceremony, infidelity on the part of the betrothed was considered adultery and punishable by death.
Being betrothed, the Virgin Mary miraculously became pregnant from Holy Spirit. The angel announced this mysterious event to Mary in advance: "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you..." (Luke 1:35). Clouds of suspicion and scandal hung over Maria. This has never happened in the entire history of mankind, for a virgin to give birth. When people saw a pregnant unmarried woman, there was only one explanation for this.
1,19 Even Joseph did not yet know the truthful explanation of Mary's condition. He could be angry with his fiancee for two reasons: firstly, for her obvious infidelity to him; and, secondly, for the fact that he would certainly be accused of complicity, although this was not his fault. His love for Mary and his desire to do what was right led him to attempt to break off the engagement with a tacit divorce. He wanted to avoid the public disgrace that usually accompanied such a case.
1,20 While this noble and prudent man pondered his strategy for protecting Mary, An angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream. Greetings "Joseph, son of David" was no doubt intended to awaken in him the consciousness of his royal lineage and to prepare him for the unusual coming of the Israelite Messiah-King. He should have no doubts about marrying Mary. Any suspicion of her purity was unfounded. Her pregnancy is a miracle, perfect Holy Spirit.
1,21 Then the angel revealed to him the gender, name and calling of the unborn Child. Maria will give birth Son. It will need to be named Jesus(which means "Jehovah is salvation" or "Jehovah is the Savior"). According to His Name He will save His people from their sins. That Child of Destiny was Jehovah Himself, who visited the earth to save people from the wages of sin, from the power of sin, and ultimately from all sin.
1,22 When Matthew described these events, he realized that a new era had begun in the history of God's relationship with the human race. The words of the messianic prophecy, which had long remained a dogma, now came to life. Isaiah's enigmatic prophecy has now been fulfilled in Mary's Child: "And all this happened, so that what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet may come true ..." Matthew claims that the words of Isaiah, which the Lord spoke through him, at least 700 years before Christ, are inspired from above.
1,23 The prophecy of Isaiah 7:14 foretold a unique birth ("Behold, the Virgin shall conceive"), gender ("and she shall bear a Son"), and the name of the Child ("and his name shall be called Immanuel"). Matthew adds the explanation that Emmanuel Means "God is with us". Nowhere is it recorded that during the life of Christ on earth He was ever called "Immanuel". He was always called "Jesus". However, the essence of the name Jesus (see v. 21) implies the presence God is with us. Perhaps Immanuel is a title of Christ that will be used primarily at His second coming.
1,24 Through the intervention of an angel, Joseph abandoned his plan to divorce Mary. He acknowledged their engagement until the birth of Jesus, after which he married her.
1,25 The doctrine that Mary remained a virgin all her life is refuted by marriage, which is mentioned in this verse. Other references indicating that Mary had children by Joseph are found in Matt. 12.46; 13.55-56; Mk. 6.3; In. 7:3.5; Acts. 1.14; 1 Cor. 9:5 and Gal. 1.19. By marrying Mary, Joseph also accepted her Child as his Son. This is how Jesus became the legal heir to the throne of David. Obeying the angelic guest, Joseph gave baby name Jesus.
Thus was born the Messiah-King. The Eternal has stepped into time. The Almighty became a tender Child. The Lord of glory covered that glory with a human body, and "in him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily" (Col. 2:9).
Kinship book. Why didn't St. Matthew say "vision" or "word", like the prophets, for they thus wrote: "The vision that Isaiah saw" (Isaiah 1, 1) or "The word that came to Isaiah" (Isaiah 2, 1)? Do you want to know why? Because the prophets addressed the hard-hearted and rebellious, and therefore they said that this is a Divine vision and the word of God, so that the people would be afraid and not neglect what they said. Matthew, however, spoke to the faithful, the well-meaning, as well as the obedient, and therefore did not previously say anything similar to the prophets. I also have something else to say: what the prophets saw, they saw with their minds, contemplating it through the Holy Spirit; that's why they called it a vision. Matthew, however, did not mentally see Christ and contemplate Him, but morally abode with Him and sensually listened to Him, contemplating Him in the flesh; therefore he did not say, "the vision which I saw," or "contemplation," but said, "The book of kinship."
Jesus. The name "Jesus" is not Greek, but Hebrew, and in translation means "Savior", for the word "yao" among the Jews refers to salvation.
Christ. Christs ("Christ" in Greek means "anointed one") were called kings and high priests, for they were anointed with holy oil, poured out from a horn, which was placed on their heads. The Lord is called Christ both as King, for He reigned against sin, and as High Priest, for He Himself offered Himself as a sacrifice for us. He was anointed with true oil, the Holy Spirit, and anointed before others, for who else had the Spirit like the Lord? The grace of the Holy Spirit acted in the saints, but in Christ it was not the grace of the Holy Spirit that acted, but Christ Himself, together with the Spirit consubstantial with Him, performed miracles.
Son of David. After Matthew said "Jesus", he added "Son of David" so that you would not think that he was talking about another Jesus, for there was another famous Jesus, the leader of the Jews after Moses. But this one was called the son of Nun, not the son of David. He lived many generations before David, and was not from the tribe of Judah from which David came, but from another.
Son of Abraham. Why did Matthew put David before Abraham? Because David was more famous; he lived later than Abraham, and was a glorious king. Of kings, he was the first to please God and received a promise from God that Christ would rise from his seed, which is why everyone called Christ the Son of David. And David actually retained the image of Christ in himself: just as he reigned in the place of Saul, rejected by God and hated by God, so Christ came in the flesh and reigned over us after Adam lost the kingdom and power that he had over all living things and over demons. .
Abraham begat Isaac. The evangelist begins the genealogy with Abraham because he was the father of the Jews, and because he was the first to receive the promise that "in his seed all nations will be blessed." So, it is fitting to begin the genealogy of Christ from him, for Christ is the seed of Abraham, in whom all of us, who were pagans and were previously under an oath, received a blessing. Abraham in translation means "father of tongues", and Isaac - "joy", "laughter". The Evangelist does not mention the illegitimate children of Abraham, such as Ishmael and others, because the Jews did not come from them, but from Isaac.
Isaac begat Jacob; Jacob begat Judah and his brothers. You see that Matthew mentioned Judas and his brothers because twelve tribes descended from them.
Judah begat Perez and Zerah by Tamar. Judah gave Tamar in marriage to Ira, one of his sons; when this one died childless, he combined her with Ainan, who was also his son. When this one also lost his life for his shame, Judas no longer married her to anyone. But she, desiring strongly to have children from the seed of Abraham, put off her clothes of widowhood, took the form of a harlot, mingled with her father-in-law and conceived two twin children from him. When the time of birth came, the first of the sons showed his hand from the bed, as if he were the first to be born. The midwife immediately marked the child's hand that appeared with a red thread so that one could know who was born first. But the child drew his hand into the womb, and first another baby was born, and then the one who first showed the hand. Therefore, the one who was born first was called Perez, which means "break", because he violated the natural order, and the one who carried away the hand - Zarah. This story points to some mystery. Just as Zara first showed his hand, and then drew it away again, so also dwelling in Christ: it was revealed in the saints who lived before the law and circumcision, for all of them were not justified by keeping the law and commandments, but by the gospel life. Look at Abraham, who for the sake of God left his father and home and renounced nature. Look at Job, Melchizedek. But when the law came, such a life was hidden, but just as there, after the birth of Peres, later Zara came out of the womb again, so, by the giving of the law, the gospel life later shone forth, sealed with a red thread, that is, with the blood of Christ. The Evangelist mentioned these two babies because their birth signified something mysterious. In addition, although Ta-mar, apparently, does not deserve praise for having mixed with her father-in-law, the evangelist also mentioned her in order to show that Christ, who accepted everything for us, accepted such ancestors. More precisely: that by the fact that He Himself was born of them, to sanctify them, for He did not come "to call the righteous, but sinners."
Peres begat Esrom. Esrom begat Aram, Aram begat Aminadab. Aminadab begat Nahshon. Nahshon begat Salmon. Salmon begat Boaz by Rahava. Some think that Rahab is that Rahab the harlot who received the spies of Joshua: she saved them and she herself was saved. Matthew mentioned her in order to show that just as she was a harlot, so was the whole congregation of the Gentiles, for they committed fornication in their deeds. But those of the Gentiles who received the spies of Jesus, that is, the apostles, and believed in their words, these were all saved.
Boaz begat Obed by Ruth. This Ruth was a foreigner; nevertheless, she was married to Boaz. So the church of the Gentiles, being a foreigner and outside the covenants, forgot her people and the veneration of idols, and her father the devil, and the Son of God took her as his wife.
Obed gave birth to Jesse. Jesse begat David the king, David the king begat Solomon from the one after Uriah. And Matthew mentions Uriah's wife here with the aim of showing that one should not be ashamed of one's ancestors, but most of all try to glorify them with one's own virtue, and that everyone is pleasing to God, even if they come from a harlot, if only they have virtue.
Solomon begat Rehoboam. Rehoboam begat Abijah. Abiah begat Asa. Asa begat Jehoshaphat. Jehoshaphat begat Jehoram. Jehoram begat Uzziah. Uzziah begat Jotham. Jotham begat Ahaz. Ahaz begat Hezekiah. Hezekiah begat Manasseh. Manasseh begat Amon. Amon begat Josiah. Josiah begat Joachim. Joachim begat Jeconiah and his brothers before moving to Babylon. The Babylonian Migration is the name given to the captivity that the Jews later endured, who were taken all together to Babylon. The Babylonians also fought with them at other times, but embittered them more moderately, at the same time they completely resettled them from their fatherland.
After moving to Babylon, Jehoiachin gave birth to Salafiel. Salafiel begat Zerubbabel. Zerubbabel begat Abihu. Abihu begat Eliakim. Eliakim begat Azor. Azor begat Zadok. Zadok begat Achim. Achim begat Elihu. Elihu begat Eleazar. Eleazar begat Matthan. Matthan begat Jacob. James begat Joseph, the husband of Mary, from whom was born Jesus, called Christ. Why is the genealogy of Joseph, and not the Mother of God, given here? What part of Joseph in that seedless birth? Here Joseph was not the true father of Christ, in order to lead the genealogy of Christ from Joseph. So, listen: indeed, Joseph had no part in the birth of Christ, and therefore had to give the genealogy of the Virgin; but since there was a law - not to conduct a genealogy along the female line (Numbers 36, 6), then Matthew did not give the genealogy of the Virgin. In addition, having given the genealogy of Joseph, he also gave her genealogy, for it was a law not to take wives from another tribe, or from another clan or surname, but from the same tribe and clan. Since there was such a law, it is clear that if the genealogy of Joseph is given, then the genealogy of the Mother of God is also given, for the Mother of God was from the same tribe and the same family; if not, how could she be betrothed to him? Thus, the evangelist kept the law, which forbade the genealogy of the female line, but, nevertheless, gave the genealogy of the Mother of God, giving the genealogy of Joseph. And he called him the husband of Mary, according to the general custom, for we have the custom to call the betrothed the husband of the betrothed, although the marriage has not yet been consummated.
So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; and from David to the migration to Babylon fourteen generations; and from the migration to Babylon to Christ, fourteen generations. Matthew divided the generations into three parts to show the Jews that whether they were under the control of judges, as it was before David, or under the control of kings, as it was before the resettlement, or under the control of high priests, as it was before the coming of Christ, they they did not receive any benefit from this in relation to virtue and needed a true judge, king and high priest, who is Christ. For when the kings ceased, according to the prophecy of Jacob, Christ came. But how can there be fourteen generations from the Babylonian migration to Christ, when there are only thirteen of them? If a woman could be included in the genealogy, then we would also include Mary and complete the number. But the woman is not included in the genealogy. How can this be resolved? Some say that Matthew counted the migration as a person.
The birth of Jesus Christ was like this: after the betrothal of His Mother Mary to Joseph. Why did God allow Mary to be betrothed, and in general, why did He give people a reason to suspect that Joseph knew her? So that she has a protector in misfortunes. For he took care of her during her flight into Egypt and saved her. However, she was also betrothed in order to hide her from the devil. The devil, having heard what the Virgin would have in the womb, would have watched her. So, in order for the liar to be deceived, the Ever-Virgin betrothed to Joseph. The marriage was only in appearance, but in reality it did not exist.
Before they were combined, it turned out that she was pregnant with the Holy Spirit. The word "combine" here means coition. Before they were combined, Mary conceived, which is why the amazed evangelist exclaims: “it turned out,” as if speaking of something extraordinary.
Joseph, her husband, being righteous and not wanting to publicize her, wanted to secretly let her go. How was Joseph righteous? While the law commands the adulterous woman to be exposed, that is, to announce and punish her, he intended to cover up the sin and transgress the law. The question is resolved first of all in the sense that through this very Joseph was righteous. He did not want to be harsh, but, philanthropic in his great kindness, he shows himself above the law and lives above the commandments of the law. Then, Joseph himself knew that Mary conceived from the Holy Spirit, and therefore did not want to expose and punish the one who conceived from the Holy Spirit, and not from an adulterer. For look what the evangelist says: "it turned out that she was pregnant with the Holy Spirit." For whom "it turned out"? For Joseph, that is, he learned that Mary conceived by the Holy Spirit. Therefore, I wanted to secretly let her go, as if not daring to have a wife who was worthy of such great grace.
But when he thought this, lo, the Angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying. When the righteous hesitated, an angel appeared, teaching him what he should do. In a dream, he appears to him, because Joseph had a strong faith. With the shepherds, as rude, the angel spoke in reality, with Joseph, as the righteous and faithful, in a dream. How could he not believe when an angel taught him what he himself reasoned with himself and about which he did not tell anyone? While he was meditating but not telling anyone, an angel appeared to him. Of course, Joseph believed that this was from God, for only God knows the inexpressible.
Joseph, son of David. He called him the son of David, reminding him of the prophecy that Christ would come from the seed of David. Saying this, the angel urged Joseph not to believe, but to think of David, who had received the promise concerning Christ.
Don't be afraid to accept. This shows that Joseph was afraid to have Mary, so as not to offend God by the fact that he patronizes the adulteress. Or in other words: "do not be afraid," that is, be afraid to touch her, as if she had conceived from the Holy Spirit, but "do not be afraid to receive," that is, to have in your home. For in mind and thought Joseph had already let go of Mary.
Mary, your wife. This is the angel speaking: "Perhaps you think that she is an adulteress. I tell you that she is your wife," that is, she is not corrupted by anyone, but your bride.
For what is born in her is from the Holy Spirit. For not only is she far from illegitimate mixing, but she has conceived in some divine way, so that you should rejoice more.
Will give birth to a Son. Lest anyone say: "But why should I believe you that what is born is of the Spirit?", the angel speaks of the future, namely, that the Virgin will give birth to a Son. "If in this case I turn out to be right, then it is clear that this is also true - "from the Holy Spirit." He did not say "will give birth to you", but simply "will give birth." for him alone grace appeared, but it was poured out on all.
And you will call His name Jesus. You will name, of course, as a father and as a patron of the Virgin. For Joseph, having learned that the conception is from the Spirit, did not even think about letting the Virgin go helpless. And you will help Mary in everything.
For He will save His people from their sins. Here it is interpreted what the word "Jesus" means, namely, the Savior, "for He," it is said, "will save His people" - not only the Jewish people, but also the pagan people, who strive to believe and become His people. What will it save you from? Is it not from the war? No, but from "their sins." From this it is clear that the One who will be born is God, for to forgive sins is characteristic of God alone.
And all this happened, so that what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet who speaks would come true. Do not think that this has recently become pleasing to God, long ago, from the beginning. You, Joseph, as one brought up in the law and knowing the prophets, consider what the Lord said. He did not say "what was spoken by Isaiah," but "by the Lord," for it was not man who spoke, but God through the mouth of man, so that the prophecy is quite reliable.
Behold, the Virgin in the womb will receive. The Jews say that the prophet does not have a "virgin", but a "young woman". They need to be told that in the language of the Holy Scriptures, a young woman and a virgin are one and the same, for it calls the uncorrupted a young woman. Then, if it was not a virgin who gave birth, how could it be a sign and a miracle? For listen to Isaiah, who says that "for this reason the Lord Himself will give you a sign" (Isaiah 6:14), and immediately adds "behold, virgin" and so on. Therefore, if the virgin had not given birth, there would have been no sign. So, the Jews, plotting evil, distort the Scriptures and instead of "virgin" they put "young woman." But whether a "young woman" or a "virgin" is worth it, in any case, she who has to give birth must be considered a virgin, so that this is a miracle.
And she will give birth to a Son and will call His name: Immanuel, which means: God is with us. The Jews say: why is He called not Immanuel, but Jesus Christ? It must be said to this that the prophet does not say "you will call", but "they will call", that is, the very deeds will show that He is God, although He lives with us. Divine Scripture gives names from deeds, such as: "call him a name: Mager-shelal-hashbaz" (Is. 8, 3), but where and who is called by such a name? Since at the same time with the birth of the Lord it was plundered and captivated - wandering (idolatry) ceased, therefore it is said that He is called so, having received the name from His work.
Rising from sleep, Joseph did as the Angel of the Lord commanded him. Look at the awakened soul, how quickly it is convinced.
And he took his wife. Matthew constantly calls Mary the wife of Joseph, expelling evil suspicion and teaching that she was the wife of no one else, but precisely him.
And I did not know how she finally gave birth, that is, he never mixed with her, for the word "how" (until) here means not that he did not know her before birth, but then he knew, but that he never knew her at all. Such is the peculiarity of the language of Scripture; so, the vran did not return to the ark, "until the water dried up from the earth" (Gen. 8, 6), but he did not return even after that; or else: "I am with you all the days until the end of the age" (Mt. 28:20), but after the end, won't it be? How? Then even more so. Similarly, here the words: "as at last she gave birth" understand in the sense that Joseph did not know her either before or after her birth. For how would Joseph have touched this saint when he knew well her unspeakable birth?
Son of His firstborn. She calls Him the first-born, not because she gave birth to any other son, but simply because He was the first born and the only one: Christ is both the “first-begotten”, as he was born first, and the “only-begotten”, as having no second brother.
And he called his name: Jesus. Joseph shows his obedience here too, because he did what the angel told him.
The Gospel of Matthew was written at the end of the first century. The main leitmotif is the preaching and life of Our Lord Jesus Christ. The text contains a huge number of references to the Scriptures of the Old Testament.
The story begins by listing the genealogy of the Lord. Thus, the writer shows the reader that the Lord is a descendant of Abraham and King David. The time of all prophecies has come, and they have been fulfilled.
Interpretation of the Gospel of Matthew
There are various methods of interpreting the Bible in Orthodox theology. The most famous theological schools are Alexandrian and Antioch. Many Holy Fathers interpreted the inspired text.
Among the well-known interpreters: John Chrysostom, Basil the Great, Maxim the Confessor, Gregory the Theologian, Theodoret of Cyrus, Theophylact of Bulgaria.
Each of them found amazing things in Scripture and, inspired by the Holy Spirit, interpreted the text according to Orthodox theology and Holy Tradition.
In the fifth century, the text was divided into chapters to make it easier to navigate through it. The Gospel of Matthew has 28 chapters. A very brief abstract of each chapter is presented below.
Chapter 1
The reader is introduced to the genealogy of the Lord. Further, the evangelist tells about the reaction of Joseph when the righteous elder found out that the Blessed Virgin was pregnant. His desire to let go of the Pure One was stopped by an Angel. Having to go to Bethlehem for the census. Birth of the Divine Infant.
Chapter 2
The Magi discovered a star in the sky that foreshadowed the birth of the Savior of the world. It is described how they came with congratulations to Herod. The ruler of Judea wants to kill the born King.
Magi bring gifts to the Divine Infant. The Lord reveals to the magi the plan of the wicked ruler of Judea. Herod destroys children in Nazareth. Flight of the Holy Family to Egypt.
Chapter 3
Sermon of John the Baptist. The last Old Testament prophet calls for repentance. He points out to the Pharisees and Sadducees the need for moral purification. Repentance is not just a rite, but a holistic change in the entire inner state. The Lord comes to John. The Forerunner tries to refuse the Baptism of the Savior Himself. The word that Jesus Himself will baptize with fire and the Spirit.
Chapter 4
After Baptism, the Lord retires to the desert, where he arrives in fasting and prayer. A forty-day fast in the desert, which ends with the incredible exhaustion of the Savior. There are temptations from the Devil, who is trying to tempt Christ with the power of this world. The call of the apostles. The first miracles, healing of the sick, blind people.
Chapter 5
Pronunciation of the Sermon on the Mount. Perfection of the new moral law. Parable about the salt of the earth. The Lord calls not to be angry, to live in peace, try not to offend and not be offended. Try to pray for your enemies. Never swear by heaven or earth or by the name of God.
Chapter 6
Continuation of the Sermon on the Mount. The giving of the prayer "Our Father". Teaching about the need for fasting and forgiveness of offenses.
A word about the birds of the air, which neither sow nor reap, but the Heavenly Father feeds them. The true treasure is not on earth, but in heaven. It is necessary to make a choice between earthly goods and faith in God.
Chapter 7
Continuation of the Sermon on the Mount. The Lord reveals to the hearers the perfect law expressed in the Beatitudes. He says Christians are the salt of the earth. A word about a log in one's own eye. Pronunciation of parables that had a huge impact on people.
Chapter 8
Many miracles of the Lord were performed by Him and described in the sacred text. This chapter tells about the healing of a leper, it talks about the faith of a Roman soldier. Management of earth elements, wind and sea. Jesus has nowhere to sleep, not a single house sheltered Him. Healing of the possessed Capernaum, the expulsion of Christ from the city.
Chapter 9
Temptation by the Pharisees and Sadducees, the healing of a paralyzed man. Forgiveness of sins. Various parables. Sharing food with sinners is the answer to the lawyers. Resurrection of a dead girl. Healing of a woman who suffered from an unknown disease for 40 years.
Chapter 10
The Lord gives his disciples power and sends them to preach. Indicates that they should preach everywhere and not be afraid to go anywhere. Evangelizing the gospel is a special work that should not be paid.
All labor will be rewarded in heaven. The Lord also repeatedly says that the apostles will suffer much for preaching his teachings.
Chapter 11
John the Baptist sends his disciples to the Lord. Jesus Christ calls John a true prophet. After that, the Lord convicts the proud. Reveals the doctrine of the heavenly Jerusalem, that babies and people who are struggling with their passions, sins and lust can get there. Proud people are deprived of the opportunity to go to heaven.
Chapter 12
God the Father does not need a sacrifice. Instead, love and mercy should dominate. Sabbath teaching. Parables and denunciations of lawyers and other Jews. It is necessary to live not according to the law, but according to the call of the heart, according to the law of God's love. He talks about the sign of the prophet Jonah. The Lord says that the disciple John the Theologian will be taken to heaven, just like the Most Holy Theotokos.
Chapter 13
Parables need to be understood simply, because they talk about very complex things, in a language understandable to all the people around. A cycle of parables about wheat: tares, sowers, weeds. The doctrine of the Kingdom of Heaven is revealed. The Lord compares the word of the gospel to a grain that has fallen into the ground and begins to sprout.
Chapter 14
Herod seizes the prophet John the Baptist, puts him in prison, and then executes him. The Lord feeds many people with five loaves.
Jesus Christ walks on the sea, the apostle Peter wants to move on the sea on foot. However, after leaving the boat, Peter begins to sink. The Apostles' Rebuke of Unbelief.
Chapter 15
Rebuking the Jews of hardness of heart and deviation from the instructions of God. The Lord intercedes for the Gentiles. Repeatedly He points out that for the Pharisees and Sadducees the law became just a set of rules. It is necessary to fulfill the will of God not only externally, but also internally. He feeds 4,000 people and then performs many signs and wonders. Healing the Blind from Birth.
Chapter 16
He begins to warn the apostles that soon He will be betrayed and crucified on the cross. The ardor of the Apostle Peter and praise from the Lord. The Apostle Peter will be the new foundation of the Church. The disciples need to remember about the deceit of the Pharisees. Only those who follow the Savior to the end will be able to save the soul.
Chapter 17
Casting out demons is possible only through fasting and prayer. Journey of Jesus Christ to Mount Tabor. Transformation. The apostles witness a miracle and flee in fear. The Lord forbids them to speak about what they saw and heard, but they still tell people, the rumor quickly spreads throughout Judea.
Chapter 18
It is better to lose a part of your body than to seduce someone. It is necessary to forgive a person who has sinned many times. The story of the king and the debtor. God the Father cares about every person. Nothing bad will ever happen to those who love God and follow Him. Salvation of the soul is the main goal of human life.
Chapter 19
Teaching about the life of the righteous. Blessing people to create families. Husband and wife are one flesh. Divorce is possible only in case of infidelity of one of the spouses. The material well-being of people makes the path to God difficult. The people who follow Christ will be judged with Him in heaven.
Chapter 20
The Lord tells a parable about the vineyard workers who came at different times, but received the same salary. He tells his followers directly that he will be put to death on the cross. Seeing the vacillation in the disciples, He convicts them of their lack of faith.
After that, Jesus Christ heals two blind people.
Chapter 21
Solemn entry of the Lord into Jerusalem. The joy of the people and the bitterness of the Savior. Teaching about the need not only to speak, but also to do pious deeds. The story of the evil workers of the vinedresser. The answer to the question - what is the main stone of God? It is necessary to fulfill the law not in words, but by doing good deeds.
Chapter 22
Jesus Christ tells the apostles about the Kingdom in heaven. It is necessary to separate the duties of a believer and a citizen of the country. The answer to the question: to Caesar - Caesar's, to God - God's. Man has a mortal nature and therefore must always be ready to stand before the judgment of God. People do not come to the wedding in dirty clothes, so you need to prepare the soul by cleansing it in order to stand before the Lord.
Chapter 23
All the apostles are brothers, there is no need to try to stand out from everyone and then command. It is necessary to have a righteous judgment, distribute alms and believe in God. Inner beauty is more important. The Jews should not be proud and proud that they were chosen by God the Father, because they have the blood of the prophets, whom they mercilessly killed.
Chapter 24
You must always be prepared for death. The Lord reveals to the apostles that the end of the world is near. Soon the earth will plunge into darkness, the sun will fade, there will be epidemics, the earth will cease to bear fruit and yield crops. Animals will die, rivers will dry up. Terrible wars will begin, people will turn into wild animals.
Chapter 25
Parable about smart maidens. All good people will be rewarded. The Lord told the followers a parable about a good and a bad slave. A good, conscientious slave will be rewarded according to its true worth, and a dishonest worker who evades his obligations will be severely punished.
Chapter 26
Establishment of the Sacrament of the Eucharist. Betrayal of Judas. Journey to the Garden of Gethsemane and prayer for the Chalice. The capture of Christ. The Apostle Peter defends Jesus Christ and attacks one of the servants of the High Priest. Christ heals the victim and orders the disciples to lay down their arms.
Chapter 27
Judgment by Pilate. The speech of Pontius and the choice of the people of Barrabas. Flagellation of Jesus Christ. Iscariot comes to the high priests and returns the money, they refuse to take it back. Suicide of Judas.
Crucifixion of the Lord. Two thieves on crosses and repentance of one of them. Burial of Jesus Christ. Security at the tomb.
Chapter 28
Resurrection. The warriors guarding the coffin fled in fear. Myrrh-bearing women go to the burial place to smear the body of the Lord with incense. An angel announces a miracle to Mary. At first, the disciples do not believe in the miraculous resurrection of the Master. The apostles saw the Savior. Unbelieving Thomas. Ascension of the Lord.
Conclusion
The Scriptures indicate the main milestones of the life of Christ. Reading the Good News is possible in Russian thanks to the synodal translation.
You can read online the Gospel of Matthew in Russian here http://www.biblioteka3.ru/biblioteka/biblija/ev_matf/index.html. Reading the Holy Scriptures is very important for every Christian and is obligatory for him.
Commentary on the book
Section comment
1 "Genealogy" (literally, "genealogical book") of Christ compiled by the evangelist on the model of Old Testament genealogies ( Gen 5 sl, 1 Par 1:1 sl). The purpose of the author is twofold - to point out the continuity between the two Testaments and to emphasize the messianic nature of Jesus (according to the promise, the Messiah was to be a "son", i.e. a descendant of David). "Jesus" is a common Jewish name (Heb" Joshua", aram" Yeshua"), meaning "the Lord is his salvation." "Christ" is a Greek word meaning the same as the Heb Messiah (Heb " mashiach", aram" Mashikha"), i.e. the Anointed One, consecrated with holy anointing. This was the name of people consecrated to the service of God (prophets, kings), as well as the Savior promised in the OT. The genealogy is opened by the name of Abraham as the forefather of the people of God, "father of believers."
2-17 "Begotten" - a Semitic turnover denoting origin in a straight line. Unlike genealogy Luke 3:23-38), the genealogy of Matthew is more schematic. The Evangelist, as it were, represents in the names the whole history of the Old Testament, mainly the family of David. Matthew divides it (according to the principle of sacred numbers) into three periods, each of which includes 14 names, i.e. twice seven. Of the four women mentioned in the genealogy, two were definitely foreigners: Rahava, a Canaanite, and Ruth, a Moabite; Bathsheba, the wife of Uriah the Hittite, and Tamar are probably not Israelites either. In this case, the mention of these women indicates the role of foreigners in the earthly genealogy of the Savior of the world. The genealogy, in accordance with Eastern custom, is in the line of Joseph, and not of the Virgin Mary. However, Her royal lineage is implicitly recognized here (cf. Luke 1:27-38). The difference between the genealogies of Luke and Mt stems from the legal consequences of the so-called levirate: the Mosaic institution is called levirate ( Deut 25:5; Mt 22:24 sl), by virtue of which the brother of an Israelite who died childless was obliged to marry his widow, and the first son from this marriage was considered the son of the deceased (the first husband of the widow). Julius Africanus (died 237), who was familiar with the records of the genealogical traditions of the offspring of David, reports that Eli, the father of St. Joseph, the betrothed of Mary, according to the genealogy of Lk, and Jacob, the father of Joseph according to Matthew, were half-brothers, (sons of the same mother from different fathers), both from the line of David, namely: Eli through the line of Nathan, Jacob through the line of Solomon. Jacob married the widow of the childless Eli, and from this marriage Joseph was born, who, being the son of Jacob, was considered, according to the law of the levirate, the son of Eli. Matthew lists the generations in descending order, Luke in ascending order up to Adam (see Eusebius Ist. 1, VII, 10).
18-19 "Betrothal" was inviolable, like marriage. It could be terminated only in accordance with the charter contained in the Mosaic legislation. Joseph, having learned that Mary was expecting a child not conceived by him, and at the same time knowing about her virtue, did not understand what had happened. "Being righteous," he wanted to "secretly let her go" so that she would not be put to death according to the prescription of the Law of Moses ( Tue 22:20 sll). For "being born of the Holy Spirit" see Lk 1 26 ff.
23 "Virgo" - this verse is borrowed from the book. Is (cm Isaiah 7:14). In the Hebrew text it says " alma", which is usually translated as "young woman". Translators into Greek (LXX) clarified the meaning of the word "alma", rendering it as "parthenos" (virgin), and the evangelist uses it in this sense. " Emmanuel" (Heb) - "God is with us."
24-25 "Joseph ... did not know Her, how at last She gave birth to a Son"- in biblical language, the denial of a fact relating to the past does not mean that it took place later. Holy Tradition and Scripture are imbued with faith in Her virginity.
1. The Evangelist Matthew (which means “gift of God”) was one of the Twelve Apostles (Mt 10:3; Mk 3:18; Lk 6:15; Acts 1:13). Luke (Lk 5:27) calls him Levi, and Mark (Mk 2:14) calls him Levi of Alpheus, i.e. son of Alpheus: it is known that some Jews had two names (for example, Joseph Barnabas or Joseph Caiaphas). Matthew was a tax collector (collector) at the Capernaum customs house, located on the coast of the Sea of Galilee (Mk 2:13-14). Apparently, he was in the service not of the Romans, but of the tetrarch (ruler) of Galilee - Herod Antipas. Matthew's profession required knowledge of the Greek language from him. The future evangelist is depicted in Scripture as a sociable person: many friends gathered in his Capernaum house. This exhausts the data of the New Testament about the person whose name is in the title of the first Gospel. According to legend, after the Ascension of Jesus Christ, he preached the Good News to the Jews in Palestine.
2. Around 120, the disciple of the Apostle John Papias of Hierapolis testifies: “Matthew wrote down the sayings of the Lord (Logia Cyriacus) in Hebrew (Hebrew here should be understood as the Aramaic dialect), and he translated them as best he could” (Eusebius, Church History, III.39). The term Logia (and the corresponding Hebrew dibrei) means not only sayings, but also events. Papias' message repeats ca. 170 St. Irenaeus of Lyons, emphasizing that the evangelist wrote for Jewish Christians (Against Heresies. III.1.1.). The historian Eusebius (4th century) writes that “Matthew, having first preached to the Jews, and then, intending to go to others, expounded in the native language the Gospel, now known by his name” (Church History, III.24). According to most modern scholars, this Aramaic Gospel (Logia) appeared between the 40s and 50s. Probably, Matthew made the first notes when he accompanied the Lord.
The original Aramaic text of the Gospel of Matthew has been lost. We have only the Greek translation, apparently made between the 70s and 80s. Its antiquity is confirmed by the mention in the works of "Apostolic Men" (St. Clement of Rome, St. Ignatius the God-bearer, St. Polycarp). Historians believe that the Greek Ev. Matthew arose in Antioch, where, along with Jewish Christians, large groups of Gentile Christians first appeared.
3. Text Ev. from Matthew indicates that its author was a Palestinian Jew. He is well acquainted with the OT, with the geography, history and customs of his people. His Ev. is closely related to the OT tradition: in particular, it constantly points to the fulfillment of prophecies in the life of the Lord.
Matthew speaks more often than others about the Church. He devotes considerable attention to the question of the conversion of the Gentiles. Of the prophets, Matthew quotes Isaiah the most (21 times). At the center of Matthew's theology is the concept of the Kingdom of God (which, in accordance with Jewish tradition, he usually calls the Kingdom of Heaven). It resides in heaven, and comes to this world in the person of the Messiah. The gospel of the Lord is the gospel of the mystery of the Kingdom (Matthew 13:11). It means the reign of God among people. In the beginning, the Kingdom is present in the world "in an inconspicuous way", and only at the end of time will its fullness be revealed. The coming of the Kingdom of God was foretold in the OT and realized in Jesus Christ as the Messiah. Therefore, Matthew often calls Him the Son of David (one of the messianic titles).
4. Plan MF: 1. Prologue. Birth and childhood of Christ (Mt 1-2); 2. Baptism of the Lord and the beginning of the sermon (Mt 3-4); 3. Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5-7); 4. Ministry of Christ in Galilee. Miracles. Those who accepted and rejected Him (Mt 8-18); 5. The road to Jerusalem (Mt 19-25); 6. Passion. Resurrection (Mt 26-28).
INTRODUCTION TO THE BOOKS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT
The Holy Scriptures of the New Testament were written in Greek, with the exception of the Gospel of Matthew, which is said to have been written in Hebrew or Aramaic. But since this Hebrew text has not survived, the Greek text is considered the original for the Gospel of Matthew. Thus, only the Greek text of the New Testament is the original, and numerous editions in various modern languages around the world are translations from the Greek original.
The Greek language in which the New Testament was written was no longer the classical Greek language and was not, as previously thought, a special New Testament language. This is the colloquial everyday language of the first century A.D., spread in the Greco-Roman world and known in science under the name "κοινη", i.e. "common speech"; yet the style, and turns of speech, and way of thinking of the sacred writers of the New Testament reveal the Hebrew or Aramaic influence.
The original text of the NT has come down to us in a large number of ancient manuscripts, more or less complete, numbering about 5000 (from the 2nd to the 16th century). Until recent years, the most ancient of them did not go back beyond the 4th century no P.X. But lately, many fragments of ancient manuscripts of the NT on papyrus (3rd and even 2nd c) have been discovered. So, for example, Bodmer's manuscripts: Ev from John, Luke, 1 and 2 Peter, Jude - were found and published in the 60s of our century. In addition to Greek manuscripts, we have ancient translations or versions into Latin, Syriac, Coptic and other languages (Vetus Itala, Peshitto, Vulgata, etc.), of which the oldest existed already from the 2nd century AD.
Finally, numerous quotations from the Church Fathers in Greek and other languages have been preserved in such quantity that if the text of the New Testament were lost and all ancient manuscripts were destroyed, then specialists could restore this text from quotations from the works of the Holy Fathers. All this abundant material makes it possible to check and refine the text of the NT and to classify its various forms (the so-called textual criticism). Compared with any ancient author (Homer, Euripides, Aeschylus, Sophocles, Cornelius Nepos, Julius Caesar, Horace, Virgil, etc.), our modern - printed - Greek text of the NT is in an exceptionally favorable position. And by the number of manuscripts, and by the brevity of time separating the oldest of them from the original, and by the number of translations, and by their antiquity, and by the seriousness and volume of critical work carried out on the text, it surpasses all other texts (for details, see "The Hidden Treasures and New Life, Archaeological Discoveries and the Gospel, Bruges, 1959, pp. 34 ff.). The text of the NT as a whole is fixed quite irrefutably.
The New Testament consists of 27 books. They are subdivided by the publishers into 260 chapters of unequal length for the purpose of providing references and citations. The original text does not contain this division. The modern division into chapters in the New Testament, as in the whole Bible, has often been ascribed to the Dominican Cardinal Hugh (1263), who elaborated it in his symphony to the Latin Vulgate, but it is now thought with great reason that this division goes back to Stephen the Archbishop of Canterbury. Langton, who died in 1228. As for the division into verses now accepted in all editions of the New Testament, it goes back to the publisher of the Greek New Testament text, Robert Stephen, and was introduced by him into his edition in 1551.
The sacred books of the New Testament are usually divided into statutory (Four Gospels), historical (Acts of the Apostles), teaching (seven conciliar epistles and fourteen epistles of the Apostle Paul) and prophetic: the Apocalypse or Revelation of St. John the Theologian (see the Long Catechism of St. Philaret of Moscow).
However, modern experts consider this distribution outdated: in fact, all the books of the New Testament are law-positive, historical, and instructive, and there is prophecy not only in the Apocalypse. New Testament science pays great attention to the exact establishment of the chronology of the gospel and other New Testament events. Scientific chronology allows the reader to follow the life and ministry of our Lord Jesus Christ, the apostles and the original Church according to the New Testament with sufficient accuracy (see Appendixes).
The books of the New Testament can be distributed as follows:
1) Three so-called Synoptic Gospels: Matthew, Mark, Luke and, separately, the fourth: the Gospel of John. New Testament scholarship devotes much attention to the study of the relationship of the first three Gospels and their relation to the Gospel of John (the synoptic problem).
2) The Book of the Acts of the Apostles and the Epistles of the Apostle Paul ("Corpus Paulinum"), which are usually divided into:
a) Early Epistles: 1 and 2 Thessalonians.
b) Greater Epistles: Galatians, 1st and 2nd Corinthians, Romans.
c) Messages from bonds, i.e. written from Rome, where ap. Paul was in prison: Philippians, Colossians, Ephesians, Philemon.
d) Pastoral Epistles: 1st to Timothy, to Titus, 2nd to Timothy.
e) The Epistle to the Hebrews.
3) Catholic Epistles ("Corpus Catholicum").
4) Revelation of John the Theologian. (Sometimes in the NT they single out "Corpus Joannicum", i.e. everything that ap Ying wrote for a comparative study of his Gospel in connection with his epistles and the book of Rev.).
FOUR GOSPEL
1. The word "gospel" (ευανγελιον) in Greek means "good news". This is how our Lord Jesus Christ Himself called His teaching (Mt 24:14; Mt 26:13; Mk 1:15; Mk 13:10; Mk 14:9; Mk 16:15). Therefore, for us, the "gospel" is inextricably linked with Him: it is the "good news" of salvation given to the world through the incarnate Son of God.
Christ and His apostles preached the gospel without writing it down. By the middle of the 1st century, this sermon had been fixed by the Church in a strong oral tradition. The Eastern custom of memorizing sayings, stories, and even large texts by heart helped the Christians of the apostolic age to accurately preserve the unwritten First Gospel. After the 1950s, when eyewitnesses to Christ's earthly ministry began to pass away one by one, the need arose to record the gospel (Luke 1:1). Thus, the “gospel” began to denote the narrative recorded by the apostles about the life and teachings of the Savior. It was read at prayer meetings and in preparing people for baptism.
2. The most important Christian centers of the 1st century (Jerusalem, Antioch, Rome, Ephesus, etc.) had their own gospels. Of these, only four (Mt, Mk, Lk, Jn) are recognized by the Church as inspired by God, i.e. written under the direct influence of the Holy Spirit. They are called "from Matthew", "from Mark", etc. (Greek “kata” corresponds to Russian “according to Matthew”, “according to Mark”, etc.), for the life and teachings of Christ are set forth in these books by these four priests. Their gospels were not brought together in one book, which made it possible to see the gospel story from different points of view. In the 2nd century, St. Irenaeus of Lyon calls the evangelists by name and points to their gospels as the only canonical ones (Against Heresies 2, 28, 2). A contemporary of St. Irenaeus, Tatian, made the first attempt to create a single gospel narrative, composed of various texts of the four gospels, the Diatessaron, i.e. gospel of four.
3. The apostles did not set themselves the goal of creating a historical work in the modern sense of the word. They sought to spread the teachings of Jesus Christ, helped people to believe in Him, correctly understand and fulfill His commandments. The testimonies of the evangelists do not coincide in all details, which proves their independence from each other: the testimonies of eyewitnesses are always individual in color. The Holy Spirit does not certify the accuracy of the details of the facts described in the gospel, but the spiritual meaning contained in them.
The minor contradictions encountered in the presentation of the evangelists are explained by the fact that God gave the priests complete freedom in conveying certain specific facts in relation to different categories of listeners, which further emphasizes the unity of meaning and direction of all four gospels (see also General Introduction, pp. 13 and 14) .
Hide
Commentary on the current passage
Commentary on the book
Section comment
1 Inscription. The Gospel of Matthew in the Russian and Slavic translations is titled the same. But this title is not similar to the title of the Gospel in Greek. There it is not as clear as in Russian and Slavic, and in short: “according to Matthew”; and the words "gospel" or "gospel" are not. The Greek expression "according to Matthew" requires explanation. The best explanation is the following. The gospel is one and indivisible, and belongs to God and not to men. Different people only expounded the single gospel given to them by God, or the Gospel. There were several such people. But actually four persons are called evangelists, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. They wrote four Gospels, that is, they presented, each from different points of view and in their own way, a single and common gospel about the single and indivisible Personality of the God-man. Therefore, the Greek Gospel says: according to Matthew, according to Mark, according to Luke and according to John, that is, one gospel of God according to the exposition of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Nothing, of course, prevents us, for the sake of clarity, from adding the word gospel or gospel to these Greek expressions, as was already done in the most remote antiquity, especially since the titles of the gospels: according to Matthew, according to Mark and others did not belong to the evangelists themselves. Similar expressions were used by the Greeks about other persons who wrote something. Yes, in Acts 17:28 it says, "as some of your poets have said," but in the literal translation from the Greek, "according to your poets," and then their own words follow. One of the church fathers Epiphanius of Cyprus, speaks of "the first book of the Pentateuch according to Moses." (Panarius, haer. VIII, 4), understanding that the Pentateuch was written by Moses himself. In the Bible, the word gospel means good news (e.g., 2 Samuel 18:20,25- LXX), and in the New Testament the word is used only about the good news or good news about salvation, about the Savior of the world.
1:1 The Gospel of Matthew begins with the genealogy of the Savior, which is presented from verse 1 to 17. In the Slavonic translation, instead of “genealogy”, “book of kinship”. The Russian and Slavic translations, though accurate, are not literal. In Greek - vivlos geneseos (βίβλος γενέσεως). Vivlos means book, and geneseos (genus. case; name. genesis or genesis) is a word that is untranslatable both into Russian and other languages. Therefore, it passed into some languages, including Russian, without translation (genesis). The word genesis means not so much birth as origin, emergence (German entstehung). In general, it denotes a relatively slow birth, more the process of birth than the act itself, and the word implies the generation, growth and final coming into being. Hence the connection of the Hebrew expression with which some genealogies begin ( Gen 2:4-5:26; 5:1-32 ; 6:9-9:29 ; 10:1 ; 11:10 ; 11:27 listen)) in the Bible, sefer toledot (book of births), with the Greek vivlos geneseos. In Hebrew, the plural is the book of births, and in Greek, the singular is geneseos, because the last word means not one birth, but a whole series of births. Therefore, to denote the plurality of births, the Greek genesis is used in the singular, although it is sometimes found in the plural. Thus, we must recognize our Slavic (book of kinship, book of relatives, calculus of genera) and Russian translations, if not completely, then approximately accurate and admit that it is impossible to translate Greek (“vivlos geneseos”) otherwise than with the word genealogy, it is impossible, for the lack of a suitable Russian word. If instead of the word origin in Slavic, sometimes being is used, and sometimes life, then such an inaccuracy can be explained by the same reason.
What is the meaning of the words “Jesus Christ” in verse 1? Of course, in the meaning of the proper name of a well-known historical Person (so in verse 18 - the word "Christ" without a member), whose life and work the evangelist intended to present to the readers. But was it not enough to call this historical Person simply Jesus? No, because that would be indeterminate. The Evangelist wants to present the genealogy of Jesus, who has already become known to both Jews and Gentiles as Christ and whom he himself recognizes not as a simple person, but as Christ, the Anointed One, the Messiah. Jesus is a Hebrew word converted from Yeshua, or (before the Babylonian captivity) Yehoshua, meaning God the Savior. So it is in the 18th verse. This name was common among the Jews. Christ, in Hebrew Messiah, means the anointed one, or the anointed one. In the Old Testament, this name was a common noun. This was the name of the Jewish kings, priests and prophets, who were anointed with sacred oil, or oil. In the New Testament, the name became proper (which is usually indicated by the Greek term), but not immediately. According to the interpretation of the blessed Theophylact, the Lord is called Christ because, as King, He reigned and reigns over sin; as a Priest, offered a sacrifice for us; and He was anointed, as the Lord, with true oil, by the Holy Spirit.
By naming a well-known historical Person as Christ, the evangelist had to prove His descent from both David and Abraham. The true Christ, or Messiah, had to come from the Jews (be the seed of Abraham) and was unthinkable for them, if he did not come from David and from Abraham. From some gospel places it is clear that the Jews not only meant the origin of Christ the Messiah from David, but also His birth in the very city where David was born (for example, Matthew 2:6). The Jews would not recognize as the Messiah a person who was not descended from David and Abraham. These forefathers were given promises about the Messiah. And the Evangelist Matthew wrote his Gospel primarily, undoubtedly, for the Jews. " Nothing could be more pleasant for a Jew than to tell him that Jesus Christ was a descendant of Abraham and David"(John Chrysostom). The prophets prophesied about Christ as about the son of David, for example. Isaiah ( 9:7 ; 55:3 ). Jeremiah ( Jer 23:5), Ezekiel ( Ezekiel 34:23; 37:25 ), Amos ( 9:11 ), etc. Therefore, speaking about Christ, or the Messiah, the evangelist immediately says that He was the Son of David, the Son of Abraham - the Son in the sense of a descendant - so often among the Jews. In words: Son of David, Son of Abraham, both in the Greek Gospel and in Russian, there is some ambiguity. These words can be understood: Jesus Christ, Who was the Son (descendant) of David, who was (in turn) a descendant of Abraham. But it is possible and so: the Son of David and the Son of Abraham. Both interpretations, of course, do not change the essence of the matter in the least. If David was the son (descendant) of Abraham, then, of course, Christ, as the Son of David, was also the descendant of Abraham. But the first interpretation corresponds more closely to the Greek text.
1:2 (Luke 3:34) Saying that Jesus Christ was the Son of David and the Son of Abraham, the evangelist, starting from the 2nd verse, proves this idea in more detail. Naming Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Judas, the evangelist points to famous historical figures who were given promises that the Savior of the world would come from them ( Gen 18:18; 22:18 ; 26:4 ; 28:14 etc.).
1:3-4 (Luke 3:32,33) Fares and Zara ( Gen 38:24-30) were twin brothers. Esrom, Aram, Aminadab, and Nahshon were probably all born and lived in Egypt after Jacob and his sons migrated there. Esrom, Aram and Aminadab are mentioned in 1 Chronicles 2:1-15 only by name, but nothing special is known. Nahshon's sister, Elizabeth, married Aaron, the brother of Moses. IN 1 Chronicles 2:10 And Numbers 2:3 Nahsson is called the "prince" or "chief" of the "sons of Judah." He was among the people involved in the calculation of the people in the wilderness of Sinai ( Numbers 1:7), and the first offered a sacrifice at the setting up of the tabernacle ( Numbers 7:2), about forty years before the capture of Jericho.
1:5 Nahshon's son, Salmon, was among the spies in Jericho who were hidden in her house by the harlot Rahab ( Joshua 2:1; 6:24 ). Salmon married her. According to the evangelist, Boaz was born from this marriage. But the Bible does not say that Rahab was the wife of Salmon (see ch. Ruth 4:21; 1 Chronicles 2:11). Hence it is concluded that the evangelist, when compiling the genealogy, "had access to information other than the Old Testament books." The reading of the name Rahab is unsteady and indefinite: Rahav, Rahab, and in Josephus Flavius - Rahava. There are chronological difficulties regarding it. The birth of Obed from Boaz and Ruth is described in detail in the book of Ruth. Ruth was a Moabite, a foreigner, and the Jews hated foreigners. The Evangelist mentions Ruth in order to show that among the Savior's ancestors were not only Jews, but also foreigners. From the reports of Ruth in the Holy Scriptures, it can be concluded that her moral character was very attractive.
1:6 Jesse is known to have had eight sons ( 1 Samuel 16:1-13; By 1 Chronicles 2:13-15 seven). Of these, the youngest was David. Jesse lived in Bethlehem and was the son of an Ephrathite from the tribe of Judah, Obed; in the time of Saul he reached old age and was the eldest among men. During the persecution of David, Saul was in danger. Speaking of the birth of David by Jesse, the Evangelist adds that Jesse begat David the king. There is no such increase when mentioning other kings, descendants of David. Maybe because it was redundant; it was enough to call one David king to show that the generation of kings, the ancestors of the Savior, began with him. David, among others, had sons Solomon and Nathan. The Evangelist Matthew leads further genealogy along the line of Solomon, Luke ( Luke 3:31) - Nathan. Solomon was the son of David from the one who was behind Uriah, that is, from such a woman who had previously been behind Uriah. The details of this are set forth in the 2nd book of Kings, ch. 11-12 and are well known. The Evangelist does not mention Bathsheba by name. But the mention of her serves here as an expression of a desire to indicate deviation from the correct order in the genealogy, since David's marriage to Bathsheba was a crime. Very little is known about Bathsheba. She was the daughter of Ammiel and the wife of Uriah the Hittite, and in all likelihood she was distinguished by many personal virtues if she became the favorite wife of the king and had a significant influence on him. Solomon was proclaimed heir to the royal throne at her request.
1:7 Solomon reigned for forty years (1015-975 B.C.). He built a temple in Jerusalem. Rehoboam, or Regovoam, the son of Solomon, reigned in Judah only "over the sons of Israel who lived in the cities of Judah." He entered the kingdom for 41 years and reigned in Jerusalem for 17 years (975-957). After him, his son Abijah came to the throne and reigned for three years (957-955). After Abijah, his son Asa (955-914) reigned.
1:8 After Asa, Jehoshaphat, or Jehosaphat his son, reigned 35 years, and reigned 25 years (914-889). After Jehoshaphat reigned Jehoram, or Jehoram, 32 years old, and reigned 8 years (891-884). Behind Jehoram, Matthew has a pass of three kings: Ahaziah, Jehoash and Amaziah, who reigned in general from 884 to 810. If this omission was made not by chance, by mistake of a scribe, but intentionally, then the reason for the exclusion from the genealogy of the three named kings should be sought in the fact that the evangelist considered them unworthy to be numbered among the heirs of David and the ancestors of Jesus Christ According to popular ideas, neither in the kingdom of Judah, nor in the kingdom of Israel, wickedness and turmoil never reached such a development as in the time of Ahab, with whose house through Athaliah the kings Ahaziah, Jehoash and Amaziah had a connection..
1:9 Jehoram's great-grandson Uzzias (810-758) is also called Azariah in the Bible. After Uzziah, Jotham, or Jotham his son, reigned 25 years, and reigned in Jerusalem 16 years (758-742). After Jotham, his son Ahaz, 20 years old, came to the throne and reigned in Jerusalem for 16 years (742-727).
1:10 After Ahaz, Hezekiah his son reigned and reigned 29 years (727-698). After Hezekiah, his son Manasseh came to the throne, 12 years old and reigned 50 years (698-643). After Manasseh, his son Ammon, or Amon, reigned (in the Gospel of Matthew, according to the oldest manuscripts, Sinai and Vatican, etc., it should be read: Amos; but in other, less valuable, but numerous manuscripts: Amon), 22 years and reigned two years (643-641).
1:11 Josiah came to the throne for 8 years and reigned for 31 years (641-610).
After Josiah, his son, Jehoahaz, the wicked king, reigned only three months, whom "the people of the earth" reigned. But the king of Egypt deposed him. Since Jehoahaz was not among the ancestors of the Savior, the evangelist does not mention him. Instead of Jehoahaz, his brother Eliakim, 25 years old, was enthroned, and he reigned in Jerusalem for 11 years (610-599)). The king of Babylon, Nebuchadnezzar, subjugated Eliakim and changed his name to Joachim.
After him his son, Jeconiah (or Joachin), reigned for 18 years, and reigned only three months (in 599). In his reign, Nebuchadnezzar, the king of Babylon, approached Jerusalem, laid siege to the city, and Jeconiah went out to the king of Babylon with his mother, servants and princes. The king of Babylon took him and moved him to Babylon, and in his place he put Matthaniah, the uncle of Jeconiah, and changed the name of Mattaniah to Zedekiah. Since the evangelist leads the further line from Jeconiah even after the resettlement to Babylon, there was no need to mention Zedekiah. After moving to Babylon, Jehoiachin was imprisoned and stayed in it for 37 years. After this, Evilmerodach, the new king of Babylon, in the year of his accession, brought Jeconiah out of the prison house, spoke to him in a friendly manner, and placed his throne above the throne of the kings who were with him in Babylon. Jeconiah ended the period of the kings of the Jews, which lasted more than 450 years.
Simple as verse 11 is, its interpretation presents insurmountable and almost insoluble difficulties. In Greek, and precisely in the best manuscripts, not like in Russian: Josiah gave birth to Jeconiah (and not Joachim) ... during (during) the Babylonian migration, i.e. to Babylon. Further in verse 12 the same as in Russian. It is assumed that the words (according to Russian translation) Josiah begat Joachim; Joachim begat Jeconiah(underlined) there is an insertion in the original words of Matthew, - it is true, very ancient, already known to Irenaeus in the second century A.D., but still an insertion, originally made in the margins in order to agree on the genealogy of Matthew with the Old Testament scripture, and then - an answer to the pagans who reproached the Christians for missing the name of Joachim in the Gospel. If the mention of Joachim is genuine, then it is easy to see (from the Russian translation) that from Solomon to Jehoiachin there were not 14 generations or generations, but 15, which contradicts the testimony of the evangelist in 17 art. In order to explain this omission and restore the correct reading of verse 11, note the following. IN 1 Chronicles 3:15,16,17 The sons of King Josiah are listed as follows: "the firstborn Jehoahaz, the second - Jehoiakim, the third - Zedekiah, the fourth - Sellum." This shows that Joachim had three brothers. Further: "Joachim's sons: Jeconiah his son, Zedekiah his son." This shows that Jeconiah had only one brother. Finally: “the sons of Jehoiachin: Assir, Salafiel”, etc. Here the gospel genealogy almost coincides with the genealogy 1 Chronicles 3:17. IN 2 Kings 24:17 Mattaniah or Zedekiah is called the uncle of Jehoiachin. Having carefully examined these testimonies, we see that Josiah had a son (second) Joachim; he had several brothers, of whom the evangelist does not speak; but speaks of the brothers of Jeconiah, meanwhile 1 Chronicles 3:16 the latter had only one brother, Zedekiah, which is inconsistent with the testimony of the Evangelist Matthew. Therefore, it is assumed that there were two Jeconiahs, the first Jeconiah, who was also called Joachim, and the second Jeconiah. Jeconiah the first was originally called Eliakim, then the king of Babylon changed his name to Joachim. The reason why he was still called Jeconiah was explained back in antiquity (Jerome) by the fact that the scribe could easily confuse Joachin with Joachim, changing x to k and n to m. The word Joachin can easily be read: Jeconiah in Hebrew, due to complete similarity of the consonants used in both names. Accepting such an interpretation, we should read verse 11 of the Gospel of Matthew as follows: “Josiah begat Jeconiah (otherwise Eliakim, Joachim) and his brothers,” etc.; Art. 12: “Jeconiah the second begat Salathiel,” etc. Against such an interpretation, it is objected that such a designation of genera is contrary to the customs observed in the genealogy. If the above interpretation were correct, then the evangelist should have expressed himself thus: “Josiah begat Jeconiah the first, Jeconiah the first begat Jeconiah the second, Jeconiah the second begat Salathiel,” etc. This difficulty, apparently, is not resolved by the assumption that "the names of father and son are so similar that they were accidentally identified or confused when reproduced in Greek." In view of this, other interpreters, in order to resolve this difficulty, suggest that the original reading of verse 11 was: “Josiah begat Jehoiakim and his brothers; Joachim begat Jeconiah during the Babylonian exile." This last interpretation is better. Although it, due to the rearrangement of the words "and his brothers" and does not agree with the existing, confirmed by ancient and important manuscripts, the Greek text of the Gospel of Matthew, however, it can be assumed that the rearrangement was made by mistake by the ancient scribes. In support of the latter interpretation, one can also point out that the existing Greek text, i.e., as mentioned above, “Josiah begat Jeconiah and his brothers during (Russian translation) the Babylonian migration” cannot be accepted without such or other changes and rearrangements and is clearly erroneous, because Josiah did not live during the Babylonian migration or during it, but 20 years earlier. As far as before Jer 22:30, where it says about Joachim: “Thus says the Lord: write down a man, his childless, a man unfortunate in his days,” then the words “childless” are explained by the subsequent expressions of the prophet, from which it is clear that the children of Jehoiakim will not sit on the throne of David and "to have dominion in Judah." It is in this last sense that the expression "bereft of children" should be understood.
1:12 (Luke 3:27) Among the sons of Jeconiah in 1 Chronicles 3:17 Salafiel is mentioned. But according to Art. 18 and 19 Jeconiah also had a son, Thedaiah, and it was to him that Zerubbabel was born. Thus, in the Gospel of Matthew, here again, apparently, there is a gap - Fedai. Meanwhile, in many other places of scripture and in Josephus Flavius, Zerubbabel is everywhere called the son of Salafiel ( 1 Ride 3:2; Nehemiah 22:1; Hagg 1:1,12; 2:2,23 ; Josephus Flavius. Jude. ancient XI, 3, §1, etc.). To explain this difficulty, it is assumed that Thedaiah, by law of piety, took the wife of the deceased Salafiel for himself, and thus the children of Thedaiah became the children of Salafiel, his brother, according to the law.
1:13-15 By 1 Chronicles 3:19ff. Abihu is not among the sons and grandsons of Zerubbabel. Based on the similarity of the names of Heb. and Greek suggest that Abihu is identical with Godaviahu v. 24th of the same chapter and Judas Luke 3:26. If so, then in the 13th verse of the Gospel of Matthew there is again a gap; precisely the genealogy in the indicated place of the book. Chronicles is stated as follows: Zerubbabel, Hananiah, Isaiah, Shechaniah, Neariah, Elioenai, Godaviahu. Although the replenishment of such a pass with six persons would bring the genealogy of Matthew closer to the genealogy of Luke in terms of the number of generations, with a complete difference in names, however, the identification of Abiud with Godaviahu is very doubtful. However, some recent interpreters accept this explanation. About the persons after Zerubbabel and, perhaps, Abiud, mentioned in verses 13-15, nothing is known either from the Old Testament, or from the writings of Josephus, or from the Talmudic and other writings. It can only be seen that this contradicts the opinion according to which the evangelist compiled the genealogy of the Savior from the Bible alone, or at least does not confirm this opinion.
1:16 (Luke 3:23) According to the Evangelist Matthew and Luke, the genealogies clearly refer to Joseph. But Matthew calls James the father of Joseph, Luke Luke 3:23- Or me. And according to legend, Joachim and Anna were the father and mother of Mary. The Savior, according to the clear narrative of Matthew and Luke Luke 1:26; 2:5 was not the son of Joseph. Why, then, did the Evangelists need to compile and place in their Gospels the genealogy of Christ, which in reality did not refer to Him? Most interpreters explain this circumstance by the fact that Matthew traces the genealogy of the ancestors of Joseph, wanting to show that Jesus was not a native, but the legitimate Son of Joseph and, therefore, the heir to his rights and advantages as a descendant of David. Luke, if in his genealogy also mentions Joseph, then in reality he sets out the genealogy of Mary. This opinion was first expressed by the ecclesiastical writer Julius Africanus (3rd century), an excerpt from whose work is placed in the Church. history Eusebius (I, 7), with changes repeated in the commentary on the Gospel of Luke Ambrose of Milan, and was known to Irenaeus (Against Heresies III, 32).
1:17 The word "all" refers closest to the generations numbered by Matthew from Abraham to David. In the subsequent expressions of the verse, the Evangelist does not repeat this word when calculating further generations. Therefore, the simplest explanation of the word "all" seems to be the following. The evangelist says “all the genealogies I have indicated in the present genealogy from Abraham to David,” etc. The number 14 was hardly sacred among the Jews, although it was composed of the repeated sacred number 7. It can be thought that the evangelist, having counted fourteen genera from Abraham to David , as well as from Jeconiah to Christ, wanted to show some roundness and correctness in the calculation of genera, why he accepted the number 14 for the middle (royal) period of his genealogy, releasing some genera for this purpose. This technique is somewhat artificial, but it is in full agreement with the customs and thinking of the Jews. Something similar occurs in Gen 5:3ff., 2:10ff., where from Adam to Noah and from Noah to Abraham, up to 10 generations are counted. Generations are understood as generations - from father to son.
Thus, the genealogy of Christ according to Matthew can be presented in the following form: I. Abraham. Isaac. Jacob. Judas. Fares. Esrom. Aram. Aminadab. Nahsson. Salmon. WHO. Ovid. Jesse. David. II. Solomon. Rehoboam. Avia. Asa. Jehoshaphat. Joram. Ozziah. Jotham. Ahaz. Hezekiah. Manasseh. Amon (Amos). Josiah. Joachim. III. Jehoiachin. Salafiel. Zerubbabel. Aviud. Eliakim. Azor. Sadok. Achim. Eliud. Eleazar. Matthan. Jacob. Joseph. Jesus Christ.
1:18 (Luke 2:1,2) At the beginning of this verse, the evangelist uses the same word as at the beginning of verse 1: genesis. In Russian and Slavic, this word is now translated by the word: Christmas. The translation is again inaccurate for lack of a suitable Russian word. In the proper sense, it would be better to translate as follows: "the origin of Jesus Christ (from the virgin Mary) was like this." The betrothal rites of the Jews were somewhat similar to ours, which happen with the blessing of the bride and groom. A contract was drawn up about the betrothal, or a solemn oral promise was given in the presence of witnesses that such and such a person would marry such and such a bride. After the betrothal, the bride was considered the betrothed wife of her groom. Their union could only be destroyed by the right divorce. But between betrothal and marriage, as in our case, whole months sometimes elapsed (cf. Deut 20:7). Mary is a Greek word; in Aramaic - Mariam, and in Heb. - Miriam or Miriam, the word is derived from the Hebrew meri - stubbornness, obstinacy - or otrum, "to be exalted, high." According to Jerome, the name means domina. All productions are questionable.
Before they combined, that is, before the wedding itself took place. Whether Joseph and Mary lived in the same house after their betrothal is unknown. According to Chrysostom, " Maria lived with him(Joseph) in the house." But the expression, "Do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife," seems to indicate that Joseph and Mary did not live in the same house. Other interpreters agree with Chrysostom.
It turned out - it became noticeable to strangers.
From the Holy Spirit. All the circumstances that the evangelist speaks of, distinguished by his miraculous character, are incomprehensible to us (cf. Luke 3:22; Acts 1:16; Eph 4:30).
1:19 Her husband - the word man, in the literal translation from the Greek, means literally a husband, not a betrothed. But it is clear that the evangelist uses this word in the sense of a protector, patron, and even, perhaps, betrothed. Otherwise, there would be an obvious contradiction in his own narrative. In the Holy In Scripture, the words husband and wife are sometimes used not in the sense of spouses ( Gen 29:21; Tue 22:24).
Being righteous - Heb. tzaddik. This was the name of the pious people, who always tried to fulfill the decrees of the law. Why Joseph is called so here is clear. Seeing that Mary was pregnant, he thought that she had done wrong, and since the law punished bad deeds, Joseph also set out to punish Mary, although this punishment, due to his kindness, should have been easy. The word righteous, however, does not mean kind or loving. In the Gospel, one can clearly observe the struggle of feelings in the soul of Joseph: on the one hand, he was righteous, and on the other, he treated Mary with pity. According to the law, he had to use power and punish her, but out of love for her, he did not want to publicize her, that is, to slander, tell others about her and then, on the basis of his announcement or story, demand the punishment of Mary. The word righteous by the expression unwilling is not explained; this is the last - an additional and special participle (in Greek participle). Joseph was a strict guardian of the law and, moreover, did not want to publicize Mary. The word to announce is read differently in Greek: 1. One reading to announce (δειγματίσαι ) should be explained as follows: set an example, flaunt for the sake of an example. The word is rare, not common among the Greeks, but in the New Testament found only in Col 2:15. It can be equivalent to the expression: just let go. 2. In many other manuscripts, a stronger word is used - to shame or endanger, to announce then to bring something evil, to put to death as a woman who did not turn out to be faithful ( παραδειγματίσαι ). Wanted - another word is used here in Greek, and not unwilling - means a decision, a desire to put one's intention into action. The Greek word translated to let go means to divorce. Divorce could be secret and explicit. The first was done in the presence of only two witnesses, without explaining the reasons for the divorce. The second solemnly and with an explanation of the reasons for the divorce at the court, Joseph set out to do the first. Secretly can also mean here secret negotiations, without a letter of divorce. It was, of course, illegal. Deut 24:1; but a bill of divorce, even if it were secret, would contradict the word secretly used in the Gospel.
1:20 But when Joseph thought this, in the word "thought" in the Greek. hesitations and doubts and even suffering are implied, behold, the angel of the Lord... "The word behold, in Russian here, is used mainly in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke and gives special power to the speech that follows it. The reader or listener is invited here to special attention. Further, the evangelist narrates how the doubts and hesitations of Joseph were eliminated. The angel of the Lord during the annunciation appeared to the Virgin Mary in reality, because on her part a conscious attitude to the gospel of the angel and consent was required; the gospel of the angel Mary was for the future and was supreme. An angel appears to Joseph in a dream, choosing sleep as a tool or means, and at the same time less perfect than waking vision, for communicating the divine will. The gospel to Joseph was not as important as the gospel to Mary, it was just a warning.
Angel means messenger, messenger; but here, of course, not a simple messenger, but the Lord's. As can be inferred from the Gospel of Luke, this was the angel Gabriel. He told Joseph in a dream (Joseph, son of David - nominatives instead of names in Greek) that he should not be afraid to accept Mary, his wife. Do not be afraid - here in the meaning: do not hesitate to do something. Accept - The interpretation of this word depends on whether Mary was in Joseph's house or outside it. If she was, then "accept" would mean the restoration of her rights as a betrothed; if she was not, then, in addition to this restoration, the word will also mean her acceptance into the house of Joseph from the house of her father or relative. Your wife: not in the sense of "as your wife." The reason why Joseph had to accept Mary is born in her, i.e., a baby not yet born or born into the world, but only conceived, therefore the neuter gender. From the time of the dream, Joseph had to become the guardian and patron of both the mother herself and the Infant.
1:21 To give birth to a son - the same verb (τέξεται ) is used as in v. 25, indicating the very act of birth (cf. Gen 17:19; Luke 1:13). The verb γεννάω is used only when it is necessary to indicate the origin of children from the father. And you will name - (so in Greek; in Slavic and some Russian editions: they will name) instead of a name, name, the future instead of command., We also use it to express softened orders, sometimes not at all different in form from the imperative (write, write, learn look, look, etc.). For He will save His people from their sins. He, it is He, He alone, will save His people (Greek λαòν) His own, that is, a known people belonging to Him, and not to anyone else. First of all, the Jewish people are understood here - this is how Joseph could understand these words; then people from every nation, but from the Jewish and from other nations only those persons who are His followers, who believe in Him, belong to Him proper. From their sins (Greek, his, that is, the people) - not from the punishment for sins, but from the sins themselves - a very important remark, indicating the authenticity of the Gospel of Matthew. At the very beginning of the gospel evangelism, even when the subsequent activity of Christ had not become clear and determined, it is indicated that Jesus Christ will save His people from their sins, not from worldly submission to secular power, but precisely from sins, crimes against the commandments of God. Here we have a clear designation of the nature of the future "spiritual activity of Christ."
1:22 It is not known whose words are given in this verse, the angel or the evangelist. According to Chrysostom, " worthy of a miracle and worthy of himself exclaimed the angel, saying", etc. That is, an angel, according to Chrysostom," sends Joseph to Isaiah, so that, waking up, if he forgets his words, as completely new, being nourished by scripture, he would remember the words of the prophet, and at the same time bring his words to memory". This opinion is also supported by some of the latest interpreters on the grounds that, if we consider these words as belonging to the evangelist, then the speech of the angel would appear unclear and unfinished.
1:23 The words given by the angel (or, in another opinion, by the evangelist himself) are found in Isaiah 7:14. They are given with minor deviations from the LXX translation; were spoken by Isaiah to the Jewish king Ahaz on the occasion of the invasion of Judah by the kings of Syria and Israel. The words of the prophet most closely pointed to the circumstances of his day. Used in the Hebrew original and Greek. transl. the word virgin means literally a virgin who has to give birth to a son naturally and from a husband (cf. Isaiah 8:3), where the same virgin is called a prophetess. But then the prophet's thought expands, he begins to contemplate future events that will come with a complete change in contemporary circumstances - instead of the invasion of the kings of Israel and Syria, the king of Assyria will subdue Judah. He “will go through Judea, flood it and rise high - it will reach the neck; and the spread of her wings will be the whole breadth of your land, Emmanuel!” ( Isaiah 8:8). If in the first prophecy one should understand an ordinary maiden, an ordinary birth, and an ordinary Jewish boy named Immanuel, then in Isaiah 8:8 by this name, as can be seen from the words of the prophet, God Himself is called. Although the prophecy did not refer to the Messiah in the Talmudic writings, it can be clearly seen that it has a higher meaning. The messianic application of prophecy was made for the first time in the Gospel of Matthew. If the words of the 23rd Art. and were the words of an angel, then the expression “what does it mean,” etc., should be attributed to the evangelist himself. This is a common Greek expression showing that a Hebrew word or words are translated or interpreted when translated from Hebrew to Greek. According to some interpreters, "what does it mean" is evidence that the Gospel of Matthew was originally written not in Hebrew, but in Greek. On the other hand, it was said that when the Gospel was translated into Greek, the expression was already inserted either by the translator or by the evangelist himself.
1:24 When Joseph woke up from his sleep, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded (properly planned, established, determined) for him.
1:25 (Luke 2:7) In this verse, it is necessary to explain first of all the words as finally, literally before, Slavic: until, until. According to ancient and modern interpreters, this word does not have such a meaning: before, therefore after (cf. Gen 8:7,14; Ps 89:2 etc.). The correct explanation of this verse is this: the evangelist speaks only of the time before the birth of the Child, and does not speak or reason about the subsequent time. At all " what happened after birth is up to you to judge"(John Chrysostom). The word "firstborn" is not found in the most important and ancient manuscripts, Xin. and V. But in other manuscripts, less important, but numerous, the word is added. It is found in Luke 2:7 where there are no discrepancies. Means the first - the last, but not always. In some cases, the first son followed by others. He called - the expression refers to Joseph. He named the Child according to the command of the angel and, by virtue of his authority, as a legitimate, though not natural, father (cf. Luke 1:62,63).
Gospel
The word "Gospel" (τὸ εὐαγγέλιον) in classical Greek was used to designate: a) the reward given to the messenger of joy (τῷ εὐαγγέλῳ), b) the sacrifice sacrificed on the occasion of receiving some kind of good news or a holiday made on the same occasion and c) the good news itself. In the New Testament, this expression means:
a) the good news that Christ accomplished the reconciliation of people with God and brought us the greatest blessings - mainly establishing the Kingdom of God on earth ( Matt. 4:23),
b) the teaching of the Lord Jesus Christ, preached by Himself and His apostles about Him as the King of this Kingdom, the Messiah and the Son of God ( 2 Cor. 4:4),
c) all New Testament or Christian teaching in general, primarily the narrative of events from the life of Christ, the most important ( 1 Cor. 15:1-4), and then an explanation of the meaning of these events ( Rome. 1:16).
e) Finally, the word "Gospel" is sometimes used to refer to the very process of preaching the Christian doctrine ( Rome. 1:1).
Sometimes the designation and content of it is attached to the word "Gospel". There are, for example, phrases: the gospel of the kingdom ( Matt. 4:23), i.e. joyful tidings of the kingdom of God, the gospel of peace ( Eph. 6:15), i.e. about the world, the gospel of salvation ( Eph. 1:13), i.e. about salvation, etc. Sometimes the genitive following the word "Gospel" means the originator or source of the good news ( Rome. 1:1, 15:16 ; 2 Cor. 11:7; 1 Thess. 2:8) or the identity of the preacher ( Rome. 2:16).
For quite a long time, stories about the life of the Lord Jesus Christ were transmitted only orally. The Lord Himself left no record of His words and deeds. In the same way, the 12 apostles were not born writers: they were “unlearned and simple people” ( Acts. 4:13), although they are literate. Among the Christians of the apostolic time there were also very few "wise according to the flesh, strong" and "noble" ( 1 Cor. 1:26), and for the majority of believers, oral stories about Christ were much more important than written ones. Thus the apostles and preachers or evangelists "transmitted" (παραδιδόναι) tales of the deeds and speeches of Christ, while the faithful "received" (παραλαμβάνειν), but, of course, not mechanically, only by memory, as can be said of the students of rabbinic schools, but whole soul, as if something living and giving life. But soon this period of oral tradition was to end. On the one hand, Christians must have felt the need for a written presentation of the Gospel in their disputes with the Jews, who, as you know, denied the reality of the miracles of Christ and even claimed that Christ did not declare Himself the Messiah. It was necessary to show the Jews that Christians have authentic stories about Christ of those persons who were either among His apostles, or who were in close communion with eyewitnesses of Christ's deeds. On the other hand, the need for a written presentation of the history of Christ began to be felt because the generation of the first disciples was gradually dying out and the ranks of direct witnesses of the miracles of Christ were thinning out. Therefore, it was necessary to fix in writing individual sayings of the Lord and His whole speeches, as well as the stories about Him of the apostles. It was then that separate records of what was reported in the oral tradition about Christ began to appear here and there. Most carefully they wrote down the words of Christ, which contained the rules of the Christian life, and were much freer in the transfer of various events from the life of Christ, retaining only their general impression. Thus, one thing in these records, due to its originality, was transmitted everywhere in the same way, while the other was modified. These initial notes did not think about the completeness of the narrative. Even our Gospels, as can be seen from the conclusion of the Gospel of John ( In. 21:25), did not intend to report all the words and deeds of Christ. This is evident, among other things, from what is not included in them, for example, such a saying of Christ: “it is more blessed to give than to receive” ( Acts. 20:35). The Evangelist Luke reports such records, saying that many before him had already begun to compose narratives about the life of Christ, but that they did not have the proper fullness and that therefore they did not give sufficient “confirmation” in the faith ( OK. 1:1-4).
Evidently, our canonical gospels arose from the same motives. The period of their appearance can be determined at about thirty years - from 60 to 90 (the last was the Gospel of John). The first three gospels are usually called synoptic in biblical science, because they depict the life of Christ in such a way that their three narratives can be easily viewed in one and combined into one whole narrative (forecasters - from Greek - looking together). They began to be called gospels each separately, perhaps as early as the end of the 1st century, but from church writing we have information that such a name was given to the entire composition of the gospels only in the second half of the 2nd century. As for the names: “The Gospel of Matthew”, “The Gospel of Mark”, etc., then these very ancient names from Greek should be translated as follows: “The Gospel according to Matthew”, “The Gospel according to Mark” (κατὰ Ματθαῖον, κατὰ Μᾶρκον). By this, the Church wanted to say that in all the Gospels there is a single Christian gospel about Christ the Savior, but according to the images of different writers: one image belongs to Matthew, the other to Mark, etc.
four gospel
Thus the ancient Church looked upon the depiction of the life of Christ in our four gospels, not as different gospels or narratives, but as one gospel, one book in four forms. That is why in the Church the name of the Four Gospels was established behind our Gospels. Saint Irenaeus called them "the four-fold Gospel" (τετράμορφον τὸ εὐαγγέλιον - see Irenaeus Lugdunensis, Adversus haereses liber 3, ed. A. Rousseau and L. Doutreleaü Irenée Lyon. Contre les hérésies, livre 3 ., vol. 29 11, 11).
The Fathers of the Church dwell on the question: why did the Church accept not one gospel, but four? So St. John Chrysostom says: “Is it really impossible for one evangelist to write everything that is needed. Of course, he could, but when four people wrote, they did not write at the same time, not in the same place, without communicating or conspiring among themselves, and for all that they wrote in such a way that everything seemed to be pronounced by one mouth, then this is the strongest proof of the truth. You will say: "However, the opposite happened, for the four Gospels are often convicted in disagreement." This is the very sign of truth. For if the Gospels were exactly in agreement with each other in everything, even regarding the very words, then none of the enemies would believe that the Gospels were not written by ordinary mutual agreement. Now, a slight disagreement between them frees them from all suspicion. For what they say differently about time or place does not in the least impair the truth of their narration. In the main thing, which is the foundation of our life and the essence of preaching, not one of them disagrees with the other in anything and nowhere - that God became a man, worked miracles, was crucified, resurrected, ascended into heaven. ("Conversations on the Gospel of Matthew", 1).
Saint Irenaeus also finds a special symbolic meaning in the quaternary number of our Gospels. “Since there are four parts of the world in which we live, and since the Church is scattered throughout the earth and has its affirmation in the Gospel, it was necessary for her to have four pillars, from everywhere emanating incorruption and reviving the human race. The all-arranging Word, seated on the Cherubim, gave us the Gospel in four forms, but imbued with one spirit. For David also, praying for His appearance, says: "Seated on the Cherubim, reveal Yourself" ( Ps. 79:2). But the Cherubim (in the vision of the prophet Ezekiel and the Apocalypse) have four faces, and their faces are images of the activity of the Son of God. Saint Irenaeus finds it possible to attach the symbol of a lion to the Gospel of John, since this Gospel depicts Christ as the eternal King, and the lion is the king in the animal world; to the Gospel of Luke - the symbol of the calf, since Luke begins his Gospel with the image of the priestly service of Zechariah, who slaughtered the calves; to the Gospel of Matthew - a symbol of a person, since this Gospel mainly depicts the human birth of Christ, and, finally, to the Gospel of Mark - a symbol of an eagle, because Mark begins his Gospel with a mention of the prophets, to whom the Holy Spirit flew, like an eagle on wings "(Irenaeus Lugdunensis, Adversus haereses, liber 3, 11, 11-22). In other Church Fathers, the symbols of the lion and calf are moved and the first is given to Mark, and the second to John. Starting from the 5th c. in this form, the symbols of the evangelists began to join the images of the four evangelists in church painting.
Reciprocity of the Gospels
Each of the four Gospels has its own characteristics, and most of all - the Gospel of John. But the first three, as already mentioned above, have extremely much in common with each other, and this similarity involuntarily catches the eye even with a cursory reading of them. Let us first of all speak of the similarity of the Synoptic Gospels and the causes of this phenomenon.
Even Eusebius of Caesarea in his "canons" divided the Gospel of Matthew into 355 parts and noted that all three forecasters have 111 of them. In recent times, exegetes have developed an even more precise numerical formula for determining the similarity of the Gospels and calculated that the total number of verses common to all weather forecasters goes up to 350. In Matthew, then, 350 verses are peculiar only to him, in Mark there are 68 such verses, in Luke - 541. The similarities are mainly seen in the transmission of the sayings of Christ, and the differences - in the narrative part. When Matthew and Luke literally converge in their Gospels, Mark always agrees with them. The similarity between Luke and Mark is much closer than between Luke and Matthew (Lopukhin - in the Orthodox Theological Encyclopedia. T. V. C. 173). It is also remarkable that some passages of all three evangelists go in the same sequence, for example, the temptation and speech in Galilee, the calling of Matthew and the conversation about fasting, the plucking of ears and the healing of the withered hand, the calming of the storm and the healing of the demoniac of Gadarene, etc. The similarity sometimes extends even to the construction of sentences and expressions (for example, in the citation of the prophecy Mal. 3:1).
As for the differences observed among weather forecasters, there are quite a few of them. Others are reported only by two evangelists, others even by one. So, only Matthew and Luke cite the conversation on the mount of the Lord Jesus Christ, tell the story of the birth and the first years of Christ's life. One Luke speaks of the birth of John the Baptist. Other things one evangelist conveys in a more abbreviated form than another, or in a different connection than another. The details of the events in each Gospel are different, as well as the expressions.
This phenomenon of similarity and difference in the Synoptic Gospels has long attracted the attention of interpreters of Scripture, and various assumptions have long been put forward to explain this fact. More correct is the opinion that our three evangelists used a common oral source for their narrative of the life of Christ. At that time, evangelists or preachers about Christ went everywhere preaching and repeated in different places in more or less extensive form what it was considered necessary to offer to those who entered the Church. In this way a well-known definite type was formed oral gospel, and this is the type we have in writing in our synoptic gospels. Of course, at the same time, depending on the goal that this or that evangelist had, his gospel took on some special features, only characteristic of his work. At the same time, one cannot rule out the possibility that an older gospel might have been known to the evangelist who wrote later. At the same time, the difference between synoptics should be explained by the different goals that each of them had in mind when writing his Gospel.
As we have already said, the synoptic gospels are very different from the gospel of John the Theologian. Thus they depict almost exclusively the activity of Christ in Galilee, while the apostle John depicts mainly the sojourn of Christ in Judea. In regard to content, the synoptic gospels also differ considerably from the gospel of John. They give, so to speak, a more external image of the life, deeds and teachings of Christ, and from the speeches of Christ they cite only those that were accessible to the understanding of the whole people. John, on the contrary, omits a lot of the activities of Christ, for example, he cites only six miracles of Christ, but those speeches and miracles that he cites have a special deep meaning and extreme importance about the person of the Lord Jesus Christ. Finally, while the synoptics portray Christ primarily as the founder of the kingdom of God and therefore direct their readers' attention to the kingdom he founded, John draws our attention to the central point of this kingdom, from which life flows along the peripheries of the kingdom, i.e. on the Lord Jesus Christ Himself, whom John depicts as the Only Begotten Son of God and as the Light for all mankind. That is why even the ancient interpreters called the Gospel of John predominantly spiritual (πνευματικόν), in contrast to synoptic ones, as depicting a predominantly human side in the face of Christ (εὐαγγέλιον σωματικόν), i.e. bodily gospel.
However, it must be said that weather forecasters also have passages that indicate that, as weather forecasters, the activity of Christ in Judea was known ( Matt. 23:37, 27:57 ; OK. 10:38-42), so John has indications of the continuous activity of Christ in Galilee. In the same way, weather forecasters convey such sayings of Christ, which testify to His divine dignity ( Matt. 11:27), and John, for his part, also in places depicts Christ as a true man ( In. 2 etc.; John 8 and etc.). Therefore, one cannot speak of any contradiction between the synoptics and John in the depiction of the face and deed of Christ.
Reliability of the Gospels
Although criticism has long been expressed against the authenticity of the Gospels, and recently these attacks of criticism have become especially intensified (the theory of myths, especially the theory of Drews, who does not at all recognize the existence of Christ), however, all objections of criticism are so insignificant that they are shattered at the slightest collision with Christian apologetics. . Here, however, we will not cite the objections of negative criticism and analyze these objections: this will be done when interpreting the text of the Gospels itself. We will only speak about the main general grounds on which we recognize the Gospels as completely reliable documents. This is, firstly, the existence of the tradition of eyewitnesses, of whom many survived until the era when our Gospels appeared. Why should we refuse to trust these sources of our gospels? Could they have made up everything that is in our gospels? No, all the Gospels are purely historical. Secondly, it is incomprehensible why the Christian consciousness would want - so the mythical theory asserts - to crown the head of a simple rabbi Jesus with the crown of the Messiah and the Son of God? Why, for example, is it not said about the Baptist that he performed miracles? Obviously because he did not create them. And from this it follows that if Christ is said to be the Great Wonderworker, then it means that He really was like that. And why would it be possible to deny the authenticity of the miracles of Christ, since the highest miracle - His Resurrection - is witnessed like no other event in ancient history (see ch. 1 Cor. 15)?
Bibliography of Foreign Works on the Four Gospels
Bengel J. Al. Gnomon Novi Testamentï in quo ex nativa verborum VI simplicitas, profunditas, concinnitas, salubritas sensuum coelestium indicatur. Berolini, 1860.
Blass, Gram. - Blass F. Grammatik des neutestamentlichen Griechisch. Göttingen, 1911.
Westcott - The New Testament in Original Greek the text rev. by Brooke Foss Westcott. New York, 1882.
B. Weiss - Wikiwand Weiss B. Die Evangelien des Markus und Lukas. Göttingen, 1901.
Yog. Weiss (1907) - Die Schriften des Neuen Testaments, von Otto Baumgarten; Wilhelm Bousset. Hrsg. von Johannes Weis_s, Bd. 1: Die drei alteren Evangelien. Die Apostelgeschichte, Matthaeus Apostolus; Marcus Evangelista; Lucas Evangelista. . 2. Aufl. Göttingen, 1907.
Godet - Godet F. Commentar zu dem Evangelium des Johannes. Hanover, 1903.
Name De Wette W.M.L. Kurze Erklärung des Evangeliums Matthäi / Kurzgefasstes exegetisches Handbuch zum Neuen Testament, Band 1, Teil 1. Leipzig, 1857.
Keil (1879) - Keil C.F. Commentar über die Evangelien des Markus und Lukas. Leipzig, 1879.
Keil (1881) - Keil C.F. Commentar über das Evangelium des Johannes. Leipzig, 1881.
Klostermann A. Das Markusevangelium nach seinem Quellenwerthe für die evangelische Geschichte. Göttingen, 1867.
Cornelius a Lapide - Cornelius a Lapide. In SS Matthaeum et Marcum / Commentaria in scripturam sacram, t. 15. Parisiis, 1857.
Lagrange M.-J. Études bibliques: Evangile selon St. Marc. Paris, 1911.
Lange J.P. Das Evangelium nach Matthäus. Bielefeld, 1861.
Loisy (1903) - Loisy A.F. Le quatrième evangile. Paris, 1903.
Loisy (1907-1908) - Loisy A.F. Les evangeles synoptiques, 1-2. : Ceffonds, pres Montier-en-Der, 1907-1908.
Luthardt Ch.E. Das johanneische Evangelium nach seiner Eigenthümlichkeit geschildert und erklärt. Nürnberg, 1876.
Meyer (1864) - Meyer H.A.W. Kritisch exegetisches Commentar über das Neue Testament, Abteilung 1, Hälfte 1: Handbuch über das Evangelium des Matthäus. Göttingen, 1864.
Meyer (1885) - Kritisch-exegetischer Commentar über das Neue Testament hrsg. von Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer, Abteilung 1, Hälfte 2: Bernhard Weiss B. Kritisch exegetisches Handbuch über die Evangelien des Markus und Lukas. Göttingen, 1885. Meyer (1902) - Meyer H.A.W. Das Johannes-Evangelium 9. Auflage, bearbeitet von B. Weiss. Göttingen, 1902.
Merckx (1902) - Merx A. Erläuterung: Matthaeus / Die vier kanonischen Evangelien nach ihrem ältesten bekannten Texte, Teil 2, Hälfte 1. Berlin, 1902.
Merckx (1905) - Merx A. Erläuterung: Markus und Lukas / Die vier kanonischen Evangelien nach ihrem ältesten bekannten Texte. Teil 2, Hälfte 2. Berlin, 1905.
Morison J. A practical commentary on the Gospel according to St. Morison Matthew. London, 1902.
Stanton - Wikiwand Stanton V.H. The Synoptic Gospels / The Gospels as historical documents, Part 2. Cambridge, 1903. Toluc (1856) - Tholuck A. Die Bergpredigt. Gotha, 1856.
Tolyuk (1857) - Tholuck A. Commentar zum Evangelium Johannis. Gotha, 1857.
Heitmüller - see Jog. Weiss (1907).
Holtzmann (1901) - Holtzmann H.J. Die Synoptiker. Tubingen, 1901.
Holtzmann (1908) - Holtzmann H.J. Evangelium, Briefe und Offenbarung des Johannes / Hand-Commentar zum Neuen Testament bearbeitet von H. J. Holtzmann, R. A. Lipsius etc. bd. 4. Freiburg im Breisgau, 1908.
Zahn (1905) - Zahn Th. Das Evangelium des Matthäus / Commentar zum Neuen Testament, Teil 1. Leipzig, 1905.
Zahn (1908) - Zahn Th. Das Evangelium des Johannes ausgelegt / Commentar zum Neuen Testament, Teil 4. Leipzig, 1908.
Schanz (1881) - Schanz P. Commentar über das Evangelium des heiligen Marcus. Freiburg im Breisgau, 1881.
Schanz (1885) - Schanz P. Commentar über das Evangelium des heiligen Johannes. Tubingen, 1885.
Schlatter - Schlatter A. Das Evangelium des Johannes: ausgelegt fur Bibelleser. Stuttgart, 1903.
Schürer, Geschichte - Schürer E., Geschichte des jüdischen Volkes im Zeitalter Jesu Christi. bd. 1-4. Leipzig, 1901-1911.
Edersheim (1901) - Edersheim A. The life and times of Jesus the Messiah. 2 Vols. London, 1901.
Ellen - Allen W.C. A critical and exegetical commentary of the Gospel according to st. Matthew. Edinburgh, 1907.
Alford - Alford N. The Greek Testament in four volumes, vol. 1. London, 1863.
I. Introduction of the King (1:1 - 4:11)
A. His genealogy (1:1-17) (Luke 3:23-28)
Matt. 1:1. From the first words of his Gospel, Matthew declares its central theme and main character. This is Jesus Christ, and already at the beginning of the narrative, the evangelist traces His direct connection with the two main covenants made by God with Israel: His covenant with David (2 Sam. 7) and the covenant with Abraham (Gen. 12:15). Have these covenants been fulfilled in Jesus of Nazareth, and is He the promised "seed?" These questions should have arisen among the Jews first of all, and therefore Matthew considers His genealogy in such detail.
Matt. 1:2-17. Matthew gives the genealogy of Jesus according to His official father, i.e. according to Joseph (verse 16). It determines His right to the throne of King David through Solomon and his descendants (verse 6). Of particular interest is the inclusion in the genealogy of King Jeconiah (verse 11), about which Jeremiah says: "Write down this man without children" (Jeremiah 22:30). Jeremiah's prophecy, however, referred to Jeconiah's taking the throne (and the blessing of God upon his reign) in his day. Although the sons of Jeconiah never took the throne, the "royal line" continued through them.
However, if Jesus were a physical descendant of Jeconiah, He would not have been able to take the throne of David. But from the genealogy given by Luke, it follows that physically Jesus was descended from another son of David, namely from Nathan (Luke 3:31). Again, since Joseph, the official father of Jesus, was a descendant of Solomon, Jesus was entitled to the throne of David and in the line of Joseph.
Matthew traces Joseph's lineage back to Jehoiachin through his son Salathiel and grandson Zerubbabel (Matt. 1:12). Luke (3:27) also mentions Salathiel, the father of Zerubbabel, but already in the genealogy of Mary. Does the genealogy offered by Luke then indicate that Jesus was after all a physical descendant of Jeconiah? - No, because, apparently, Luke means other people who bore the same names. For Luke's Shealathiel is the son of Niriah, and Matthew's Shelafiel is the son of Jeconiah.
Another curious fact in Matthew's genealogical excursion is his inclusion of four Old Testament female names in it: Tamar (Matt. 1:3), Rahava (verse 5), Ruth (verse 5) and Bathsheba, the mother of Solomon (the latter is named after her husband - Uria). The right to include these women, as well as a number of men, in the genealogy of Christ is in some sense doubtful.
After all, Tamar and Rahab (Rahab) were harlots (Gen. 38:24; Jos. 2:1), Ruth was a Moabite pagan (Ruth. 1:4), and Bathsheba was guilty of adultery (2 Sam. 11 :2-5). Perhaps Matthew included these women in the genealogy for the purpose of emphasizing that God chooses people according to His will and mercy. But perhaps the evangelist wanted to remind the Jews of things that would diminish their pride.
When the name of the fifth woman, Mary, appears in the genealogy (Matt. 1:16), a significant change occurs. Until verse 16, it is repeated in all cases that so-and-so begat so-and-so. When it comes to Mary, it is said: from whom Jesus was born. This clearly indicates that Jesus was the physical child of Mary, but not of Joseph. The miraculous conception and birth is described in 1:18-25.
Matthew apparently does not list all the links in the lineage between Abraham and David (verses 2-6), between David and the migration to Babylon (verses 6-11), and between the migration and the birth of Jesus (verses 12-16). He names only 14 generations in each of these time periods (verse 17). According to Jewish tradition, it was not required to list every name in the genealogy. But why does Matthew name exactly 14 names in each period?
Perhaps the best explanation is that according to the Hebrew meaning of numbers, the name "David" is reduced to the number "14". It should be noted that in the time span from the migration to Babylon to the birth of Jesus (verses 12-16), we see only 13 new names. Many theologians believe in this connection that the name of Jeconiah, being repeated twice (verses 11 and 12), just “completes” the names listed in this period to “14”.
The genealogy offered by Matthew answers an important question that the Jews could rightly ask about the One who would claim the throne of the king of the Jews: "Is He really the legitimate descendant and heir of King David?" - Matthew answers: "Yes!"
B. His coming (1:18 - 2:23) (Luke 2:1-7)
1. HIS ORIGIN (1:18-23)
Matt. 1:18-23. The fact that Jesus was only the son of Mary, as suggested by the genealogy (verse 16), requires further explanation. In order to better understand what Matthew said, we need to turn to the Hebrew marriage customs. Marriages were concluded in that environment by drawing up a marriage contract by the parents of the bride and groom. Upon reaching a mutual agreement, the bride and groom became husband and wife in the eyes of society. But they didn't live together. The girl continued to live with her parents, and her "husband" with hers, for a whole year.
The purpose of this "waiting period" was to prove fidelity to the vow of purity on the part of the bride. If she were pregnant during this period of time, the proof of her impurity and possible physical infidelity to her husband would be obvious. In this case, the marriage could be annulled. If a year's wait confirmed the purity of the bride, the groom would come for her to her parents' house and take her to his house in a solemn procession. Only then did they begin their life together, and their marriage became a physical reality. When reading Matthew's account, all this must be kept in mind.
Mary and Joseph were just in that year-long waiting period when it turned out that she was pregnant. Meanwhile, there was no physical intimacy between them, and Mary remained faithful to Joseph (verses 20, 23). Although Joseph's feelings are not stated in this connection, it is not difficult to imagine how much he was grieved.
After all, he loved Mary, and suddenly it turned out that she was not pregnant from him. Joseph showed his love for her in deeds. He decided not to raise a scandal and not to take his bride to be judged before the elders at the city gates. Had he done so, Mary would likely have been stoned to death (Deut. 22:23-24). Instead, Joseph decided to secretly let her go.
And then the Angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream (compare Matt. 2:13,19,22) and informed him that what was born in her was from the Holy Spirit (1:20 compare with 1:18).
The Child in Mary's womb was a very unusual Child; The angel told Joseph to give the name Jesus to the son she would give birth to, for He would save His people from their sins. These words were to remind Joseph of God's promise of the salvation of the people through the New Testament (Jer. 31:31-37). The angel, not named here by name, also made it clear to Joseph that all this would happen in accordance with the Scriptures, since even 700 years earlier the prophet Isaiah had proclaimed: "Behold, the Virgin shall conceive and give birth to a Son ..." (Mat. 1: 23; Isaiah 7:14).
Although scholars of the Old Testament are still debating whether the Hebrew word "alma" used by the prophet Isaiah should be translated "virgin" or "young woman," God has clearly shown that it was "virgin" in question. ". The Holy Spirit inspired the translators of the Old Testament into Greek (Septuagint) to use here the word parthenos, which means "virgin", "virgin". Mary's miraculous conception of Jesus took place in fulfillment of the prophecy of Isaiah, and her Son appeared as the true Immanuel (which means: God is with us).
After receiving the revelation, Joseph got rid of his feelings of insecurity and fear and took Mary into his home (Matt. 1:20). It is possible that then rumors and gossip began among the neighbors, but Joseph knew what really happened, and what was the will of God in relation to him personally.
2. HIS BIRTH (1:24-25)
Matt. 1:24-25. So, waking up from this dream, Joseph obeyed what he was told. In violation of tradition, he immediately accepted Mary into his house, without waiting for the end of the one-year term of "betrothal". He probably proceeded from what would be best for her in her position. He accepted her as his wife, began to take care of her. However, he did not enter into marital relations with her until she gave birth to her firstborn Son.
Matthew confines himself to reporting the birth of the Child and the fact that they gave Him the name Jesus. Luke, a physician by profession (Col. 4:14), speaks a little more about the birth of the Son (Luke 2:1-17).
