brought up. Capernaum was called his own city, as it was subsequently his chief place of residence. Mat. ix. 1. Jesus had made a previous visit to Nazareth and met with an inhospitable reception, as is related Luke iv. 16―30.—Synagogue. This was on the Sabbath-day. Mark vi. 2.-They were astonished. Two reasons are assigned for their wonder and surprise,—his wisdom, or his instructions of truth, and his mighty works or miracles. As he had been brought up amongst them, they could not realize that he was anything more than a common individual, for he had studied under none of the doctors of the law. John vii. 15.

55. Carpenter's son. Mark, vi. 3, records it, "Is not this the carpenter?" As Joseph worked at some mechanical trade, it is probable that Jesus also pursued the same occupation before his ministry. It was the custom of the Jews for the sons even of rich and distinguished men to learn some useful handicraft. Joseph was probably poor, an additional reason why his family should be employed in manual labor.-God has eminently honored labor, and woe is the world because the false notion has crept into it, that it is disgraceful! Disgraceful! when the patriarchs, kings, and prophets of Israel were many of them shepherds and husbandmen; when David was summoned from the sheep-fold to the throne, and Elisha and Amos from their flocks and fields to the prophetic office; when the Son of God himself was subject unto his earthly parents in

his youth, and labored in their lowly employments, until his hour came when he should go forth to be the Light of the world; when fishermen apostles were his bosom friends, and Paul, the tent-maker, the herald of the Gospel to the Gentile world! Or if these human and celestial examples are not enough, "Go to the ant, thou sluggard, consider her ways and be wise."—His brethren. See notes on Mat. x. 3, xii. 46. They were probably cousins, though the question is not a material one. Three of those mentioned here, James, Simon, and Judas, probably belonged to the Twelve. Mat. xxvii. 56. Mark xv. 40.

56. His sisters. The same remark respecting the degree of relationship is applicable here as in the preceding verse.-Are they not all with us? i. e. do they not live amongst us?-Whence then hath this man all these things? There could be but one answer to this question: viz. that he derived them from on high. A young man of Nazareth of Galilee, uninstructed in the learning of his age, acquainted only with the Hebrew Scriptures, and surrounded by the narrowing influences of his time and nation, even occupied with domestic cares and mechanical labors, dilates at once into a mighty_reformer and wonder-worker. The change was too great to be credited by his former acquaintances. They incredulously inquire whence he derived his wisdom and power. Jesus on another occasion answered the question himself:-"The words that I

speak unto you, I speak not of myself; but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works."

57. They were offended in him. They were scandalized at him. They were jealous of him, for he had been brought up amongst them in an humble condition. They were acquainted with his family and friends; and they could not receive one, with whose early life they were so familiar, as being indeed a prophet or the Messiah. Pride, envy, and prejudice combined against their admission of his divine authority. A prophet is not without honor, &c. By prophet may here be meant any religious teacher. Jesus here quotes a proverb which was common among the Jews; implying that early acquaintance and familiarity with the highest personage would breed jealousy and contempt of him. Those who had been accustomed to look upon him in an humble condition could with difficulty learn to respect his new claims to the most exalted office. John iv. 44. This proverb does not imply that he was not also treated ill elsewhere, which was the fact.

58. Did not many mighty works. Mark states that he did nothing except lay his hands upon a few sick persons and heal them.-Because of their unbelief. Some have supposed that the miraculous power of Christ was dependent upon faith, as an essential condition of its exercise, and that he literally could not, as Mark says, vi. 5, exert his power, because the Nazarenes had no faith in him. But in many instances he wrought miracles upon inert matter, or upon the uncon

scious dead, or upon disbelieving or unwilling subjects. Mat. viii. 29. Luke xxii. 51. Why then, it may be asked, could he not perform his usual wonders at Nazareth? There were two reasons. One was, that he had few opportunities. There was such aversion and unbelief in relation to him, that they did not bring their sick to be healed. But in the few cases which were presented, his power was triumphant as on other occasions.-Again, there was a moral reason why he did not perform many miracles there. The people were not in a condition to be properly impressed by them. They would not admit them as wrought of God, and evidences of the divine authority of his messenger. Although, then, miracles were designed to create confidence and faith in Christ, yet, where unbelief already existed to the contrary, supported by groundless prejudices, these wonders would prove in vain. Jesus would not therefore increase their temptations, and enhance their guilt, by obtruding upon them his wonderful works, which he foresaw they would gainsay and frustrate, so far as any moral effect was concerned. Where unbelief was owing not to a want of evidence, but to a want of a right disposition to admit that évidence even when it was furnished, it was needless, and would ag gravate their guilt, to supply it.-In the conduct of the Nazarenes, we are taught the influence of groundless prejudices in preventing_the reception of the Gospel. This cause, under other forms, operates now, as it did then. Would that we might rise above the thwarting

A

influence of our prejudices! for no intellectual hindrance is greater to the perception of truth.

CHAP. XIV.

1, 2. Mark vi. 14-16. Luke ix. 7-9. The two last Evangelists are more full in their accounts, and relate not only the conjecture of Herod, but of others; of some, that it was Elijah, and of others, that it was one of the old prophets, that had appeared.

1. Herod the tetrarch. This was a son of Herod the Great, called Antipas. To him fell, in the division of his father's government, the provinces of Galilee and Peræa. See note on Mat. ii. 22.-Tetrarch signifies strictly the ruler of the fourth part of a kingdom or empire, but is also used in a more general sense.- -Heard. Absorbed in his affairs or his pleasures, Herod had not heard of Jesus as contemporaneous with John, but seems now to have learned for the first time that there was such a person. We are to recollect that there were then but few facilities for gaining intelligence, and that the news even of the works and teachings of Christ would spread but slowly, and with difficulty gain access to the courts of princes. Perhaps Herod had been absent from his province hitherto, either in his war with Aretas, king of Arabia, or on a journey to Rome. Some commentators, among whom is Kuinoel, suppose that Herod had heard of Jesus before, but that he now had

his attention called to him in a particular manner.

with

2. Servants. The inmates of his palace, or his courtiers.-This is John. Luke states that he was perplexed to know who Jesus was. In saying that this was the one whom he had beheaded, the mighty workings of a guilty conscience are laid open; the bloody image of his murdered victim rose to his mind's eye, and haunted the scenes of his splendor, and led him, as soon as this distinguished character appeared, to identify him John. A striking testimony to the force of conscience! Herod in the midst of his power and magnificence could not escape the pangs of remorse and ghastly fears, for having unjustly put to death a good man and bold censor. The arrow of self-condemnation pierces him through the purple of royalty.He is risen from the dead. It has been conjectured that Herod belonged to the sect of Sadducees, (compare Mat. xvi. 6, Mark viii. 15,) who disbelieved in the resurrection of the dead, and that his convictions of guilt overcame his speculative belief. The most wicked are often the most superstitious.—Mighty works do show forth themselves, &c. i. e. "mighty powers operate by him" which it was supposed would be the case with the prophet who was to precede the Messiah. The conscience-smitten Herod may have supposed that this power was to vindicate John's innocence and avenge his death; that the same

energy that raised him from the dead continued to operate in him and enable him to do mighty works after his resurrection.

3-5. See Mark vi. 17-20. Luke iii. 19, 20.

3. Herod had laid hold, &c. Matthew here makes a digression, to relate what had happened some time before, by way of explaining what Herod had said concerning John in verse 2.-Put him in prison. This was a gross act of injustice and tyranny, the consummation, as it would appear from Luke iii. 19, 20, of other indignities. John was imprisoned, as we learn from Josephus, in the fortress of Machærus, situated on the river Jordan north of the Dead Sea.-Herodias' sake. She was the grand-daughter of Herod the Great, and the daughter of Aristobulus. Her character was stained with licentiousness and cruelty.-Brother Philip's wife. Antipas and Philip were half-brothers, being sons of Herod the Great by different mothers. Herodias had eloped from her husband, Philip, who is supposed to have been a private man, and not the tetrarch of Iturea, by whom she had one daughter, Salome, and now lived with Herod Antipas, who had repudiated his wife, the daughter of Aretas, king of Arabia. Incensed by this outrage, Aretas made war upon Antipas, and defeated him in battle with great loss. The soldiers on their way to this war are supposed to have been the ones addressed by John the Baptist, Luke iii. 14. As Herod had rendered himself in some measure unpopular by this needless war, he would

the more fear John's influence over the people, and shrink from subjecting himself to the odium of putting so great and good a man to death.-It may be observed here that one bad act is usually a prelude to another. Adultery led to the imprisonment and death of John. The Rubicon of virtue once crossed, there is no limit to ambition and wickedness.

4. John said. Kept saying, according to Carpenter, for such is the force of the imperfect tense.→ Not lawful for thee to have her. According to the law of Moses, a man was to marry his brother's widow if he died childless, in order to perpetuate the line. But in the present instance the parties were guilty of adultery and incest, for Herod had causelessly abandoned his own, and taken another man's wife, which was adultery; and he had moreover taken a near relative, without the existence of those circumstances, viz., the death of his brother, and that without children, which could alone prevent their being guilty of incest. Thus there was a double transgression of the laws of God. Josephus confirms in his history the account here given, and thus incidentally, and all the more powerfully, substantiates the truth of the Gospels. Herod had seduced the wife of his brother while on a visit to him; a horrible breach of the rites of hospitality.

5. When he would have, i. e. when he wished. Mark says that "Herodias had a quarrel against him, and would have killed him, but she could not."-He feared the multitude, &c. The Pharisees, Mat. xxi. 26,

were prevented by the same fear of the people from saying that the baptism of John was not from heaven, but of men. Mark states the reason to have been that "Herod feared John, knowing that he was a just man and an holy." The two reasons are compatible with each other, and they disclose the independence of the historians. The evil nature of Herod shrank with fear from the bold and honest reformer. His dread was the tribute that vice pays to virtue. His fear of the people was a different and altogether lower sentiment; an apprehension lest, if John was put to death, a rebellion would be excited amongst his subjects.

6-12. See Mark vi. 21-29.

6. Herod's birth-day. It was customary for kings and princes to celebrate their birth-days with great magnificence, as we learn both from sacred and profane history. Gen. xl. 20. Upon the present occasion Herod gave an entertainment to his nobility and chief officers, Mark vi. 21. Whether the festival was at Macharus, where John was imprisoned, or elsewhere, we know not.-Daughter of Herodias. We learn from Josephus that the name of this daughter was Salome. -Danced. What was the nature of her dancing we are not informed. Some suppose it to have been of an indecent kind; but others, among whom is that great authority, Lightfoot, consider it as a dance to express joy for the life and prosperity of Herod.-Pleased Herod. It was great condescension for one in her station to appear before the

7. Give her whatsoever she would ask. Mark adds, "unto the half of my kingdom." Flushed with wine and excitement, and transported with the dancing of Salome, he is impelled in a fatal moment to make a rash and dangerous promise, confirmed with an oath. For another instance of a rash vow, see Judges xi, 31.

8. Instructed of her mother. It would appear from Mark that she was not instructed before she came in to dance, but that she went out, and received her instructions before she gave her answer. Perhaps there was a preconcerted design to accomplish John's death, though it seems hardly probable.-John Baptist's. An erroneous translation for John the Baptist's. In a charger. An antiquated word, meaning a platter or large dish. It was customary for rulers and kings to require the head of their victim to be brought to them after his execution, both as a proof of its certainty and as a gratification to their revenge. Thus in ancient Rome the head of her rival was brought to Agrippina, the mother of Nero; and, in modern times, the head of a celebrated Turkish pacha, after being cut off, was sent to Constantinople, and exhibited publicly on a dish. From the account in Mark vi. 25, we might infer that Salome was quite young, from the childlike sprightliness and haste with which she returned from her moth