Delphi Complete Works of George Eliot (Illustrated) (714 page)

Read Delphi Complete Works of George Eliot (Illustrated) Online

Authors: George Eliot

BOOK: Delphi Complete Works of George Eliot (Illustrated)
5.46Mb size Format: txt, pdf, ePub
N. T. Gramm. s. 149.Comp. also Exod. iv. 20 witli Matt. ii. 14, 21.
 
§ Vide e. g.
Schottgen, hone, ii. p 209.
 
* Tlieile, zur Biographic ,Iesu, § l.”>, Anm. 9. IIoffinann, S. 2C9.-i- Comp my Streitschriften, i. 1,8. 43 f. ; George, s. 39.f Keander, L. J. Cli. s. 37.|! Srhleiermaclicr, (fiber den Lukas, s. 47) explains tlie narrative concerning the magi as a symbolical one ; but lie scorns to take into. consideration the passages from tile 0, ‘1’. and other writings, which have a bearing on the subject, and liy way of retribution, Ins exposition at tine time rests ill generalities, at another, takes a wrong patli. § Lightfuot,
THE LIFE OE JESCS.
 
has been supposed, to give the true circumstances, and Luke has had the preference, Matthew’s narrative being regarded as an embellished edition.
 
According to this opinion, the angel clothed, in heavenly brightness, in Luke, became a star in the tradition recorded by Matthew, the ideas of angels and stars being confounded in the higher Jewish theology; tlie shepherds were exalted, into royal magi, kings being in antiquity called the shepherds of their people.* This derivation..
is too elaborate to be probable, even were it true, as it is here assumed, that Luke’s narrative bears the stamp of historical credibility. As, however, we conceive that we have proved the contrary, and as, consequently, we have before us two equally unhistorical narratives, there is no reason for preferring a forced and unnatural derivation of Mattliew’s narrative from that of Luke, to the very simple derivation which may bo traced, through Old Testament passages and Jewish notions. These two descriptions of the introduction of Jesus into the world, are, therefore, two variations on the same theme, composed, however, quite independently of each other.
 
§ 37. CHRONOLOGICAL GELATION BETWEEN THE VISIT OF THE MAGI, TOGETHER WITH THE FLIGHT INTO EGYPT, AND THE PRESENTATION.
IN THE TEMPLE RECORDED BY LL’KE.
 
IT has been already remarked, that the narratives of Matthew and Luke above considered at first run tolerably parallel, but afterwards widely diverge; for instead of the tragical catastrophe of the massacre and flight, Luke has preserved to us the peaceful scene of the presentation of the child Jesus in the temple. Let us for the present shut our eyes to the result of the preceding inquiry-the purely mythical character of Matthew’s narrative-and ask: In what chronological relation could tlie presentation in the temple stand, to the visit of the magi and the flight into Egypt ?
 
Of these occurrences the only one that has a precise date is the presentation in the temple, of which it is said that it took place at the expiration of the period appointed by the law for the purification of a mother, tliat is, according to Levit. xii. 2-4, forty days after tlie birth of tlie child (Luke ii. 22). The time of tlie other incidents is not fixed with the same exactness ; it is merely said that the magi came to Jerusalem, TOV ‘l’r]aov ^nvvrfiiiv-roq EV VrjOXsep, (Matt. ii. 1)llow long after the birth tlie Evangelist does not decide. As, however, the participle connects the visit of the magi with the birth of the child, if not immediately, at least so closely that notliing of importance can be supposed to have intervened, some expositors have been led to tlie opinion tliat the visit ought to be regarded as prior to the presentation in the temple, f Admitting tins arrangement we
* Sdmeckenburger, fite den Uraprong des ersten kanonischen Evangcliums S. GO ff.
---r^.,-„, ;{ ^ kitnrT nmisn. acad. iii. S. 96 ff.
 
BIETH AND EAELY LIFE OF JESCS.
 
177
 
have to reconcile it with one of two alternatives: either the flight into Egypt also preceded the presentation in the temple; or, while the visit of the magi preceded, the flight followed tliat event.
 
If we adopt the latter alternative, and thrust tlie presentation in the temple between the visit of the magi and the flight, we come into collision at once with tlie text of Mattliew and tlie mutual relation of the facts.
 
The evangelist connects tlie command to flee into Egypt with tlie return of the magi, by a participii’.l construction (v. 13) similar to tliat by which he connects the arrival of tlie oriental sages with the birth of Jesus; hence those, who in tlie one instance liold such a construction to be a reason for placing tlie events which it associates in close succession, must in the other instance be withheld by it from inserting a third occurrence between the visit and tlie flight. As regards tlie mutual relation of the facts, it can hardly be considered probable, that at the very point of time in which Joseph received a divine intimation, that he was no longer safe in Bethlehem from tlie designs of Herod lie should be permitted to take a journey to Jerusalem, and thus to rush directly into the lion’s mouth. At all events, the strictest precautions must have been enjoined on all wlio were privy to tlie presence of the messianic child in Jerusalem, lest a rumour of tlie fact should get abroad.
 
But there is no trace of this solicitous incognito in Luke’s narrative; on the contrary, not only does Simeon call attention to Jesus in the temple, unchecked cither by tlie Holy Spirit or by the parents, but Anna also thinks she is serving tlie good cause, by publishing as widely as possible tlie tiding’s of the Messiah’s birth (Luke ii, 28 ff.
38). It is true that she is said to have confined her communications to those who were like-minded with herself (e^aAEi T-ept avov rrafft rolf; TTpoaSe^ofievwc; Avrpuaiv ev ‘lepovoa/’,/)^), but this could not hinder them from reaching the ears of the Herodian party, for the greater tlie excitement produced by such news on the minds of those zu/w looked for redemption, tlie more would the vigilance of the government be aroused, so that Jesus would inevitably fall into the hands of the tyrant who was lying in wait.
 
Thus in any case, they who place the presentation in tlie temple after tlie visit of the magi, must also determine to postpone it until after tlie return from Egypt. But even tills arrangement clashes with the evangelical statement; for it requires us to insert, between the birth of Jesus and his presentation in the temple, the following events : the arrival of tlie magi, the flight into Egypt, tlie Bethlehem massacre, the death of Herod, and the return of the parents of Jesus out of Egypt-obviously too much to be included in tlie space of forty days. It must therefore be supposed, tliat tlie presentation of the cliild, and the first appearance of the mother in the temple, were procrastinated beyond tlie time appointed by the law. This expedient, however, runs counter to tlie narrative of Luke, who expressly says, that the visit to tlie temple took place at the legal
tiiriolini- in
THE LIFE OF JESU8.
 
two, must we not deny to both an historical character ? The answer to this question will be found in the succeeding examination.
 
§ 38. THE PEESENTATION OF JESUS IN THE TEMPLE.
 
THE narrative of the presentation of Jesus in the temple (Luke ii. 22\ seems, at the first glance, to bear a thoroughly historical
/
 
• o’0*/
 
stamp. A double law, on the one hand prescribing to tlie mother an offering of purification, on the other, requiring tlie redemption of tlie first-born son, leads the parents of Jesus to Jerusalem and to the temple. Here thcv meet with a devout man, absorbed in the
expectation of tlie Messiah, named Simeon. Many expositors hold •• •”•• ••
 
••’
 
^----•^-.n,,,T?.,i,T.,.:ei;,^,^ +^n c,^ nf Tr;1
this Simeon to be the same witli tlie Rabbi Simeon, the son of Hillel, Ills successor as president of the Sanhedrim, and the father of Oamaliel; some even identify him with the Sameas of Josephus,*
and attach importance to his pretended descent from David, because this descent makes him a relative of Jesus, and helps to explain the following scene naturally; but this hypothesis is improbable, for Luke would hardly have introduced so celebrated a personage by the meagre designation, av9pwr6^ -ic, (a certain man.t) Without this hypothesis, however, tlie scene between tlie parents of Jesus and Simeon, as also the part played by Anna tlie prophetess, seems to admit ot a very natural explanation. There is no necessity for supposing, with the author of the Natural History,! tliat Simeon was previously aware of tlie hope cherished by Mary tliat she was about to give birth to the Messiah; we need only, with Paulus and others, conceive the facts in the following manner. Animated, like many of tliat period, witli tlie hope of tlie speedy advent of tlie Messiah, Situe^n receives, probably in a dream, the assurance tliat before his death he will be permitted to see the expected deliverer of his nation. One day, in obedience to an irresistible impulse, lie visited the temple, and on this very day Mary brought thither her cliild, whose beauty at once attracted his notice; on learning tlie child’s descent from David, the attention and interest of Simeon were excited to a degree that induced Mary to disclose to him tlie hopes which were reposed on tins scion of ancient royalty, witli tlie extraordinary occurrences by which they liad been called into existence.
These hopes Simeon embraced with confidence, and in enthusiastic language gave utterance to his messianic expectations and forebodings, under the conviction tliat they would be fulfilled in tills cliild.
Still less do we need the supposition of the author of tlie Natural History with respect to Anna, namely, tliat slie was one of the women who assisted at tlie birth of tlie infant Jesus, and was tlius acquainted beforehand witli tlie marvels and tlie hopes tliat liad clustered round his cradle;-she had heard tlie words of Simeon,
* Antiq. xiv. ix. 4, xv. i. 1 and x. 4.
 
\ The Evang. Nicodemi indeed calls him, c.
• ‘ ‘ f *’---i- „„,! .1,^ Ti^>tn^ Ti^n /. -^viv. iiiiikcs him a priest or even high
BIKTH AND EARLY LIFE OF JESUS.181
 
and being animated by the same sentiments, she gave them her approval..
 
Simple as tins explanation appears, it is not less arbitrary than we have already found other specimens of natural interpretation.
Tlie evangelist nowhere says, tliat the parents of Jesus had communicated anything concerning tlieir extraordinary hopes to Simeon, before lie poured forth Ills inspired words; on tlie contrary, tlie point of Ills entire narrative consists in the idea that the a^’ed saint had, by virtue of the spirit witli which lie was filled, instantaneously discerned in Jesus tlie messianic child, and the reason why the co-operation of tlie Holy Spirit is’ insisted on, is to make it evident how Simeon was enabled, without any previous information, to recognise in Jesus the promised cliild, and at tlie same time to foretel the course of his destiny. Our canonical Gospel refers Simeon’s recognition of Jesus to a supernatural principle resident in Simeon himself; the Evangelium infantice arabicum refers it to something objective in tlie appearance of Jesus*-far more in the spirit of the original narrative than tlie natural interpretation, for it retains tlie miraculous element. But, apart from tlie general reasons against the credibility of miracles, tlie admission of a miracle in tills instance is attended with a special difficulty, because no worthv object for an extraordinary manifestation of divine power is discoverable. For, tliat tlie above occurrence during tlie infancy of Jesus served to disseminate and establish in more distant circles the persuasion of his Messialisllip, there is no indication; we must therefore, with the evangelist, limit tlie object of these supernatural communications to Simeon and Anna, to wliose devout liopcs was vouchsafed the special reward of having their eyes enlightened to discern the messianic child.
But tliat miracles should be ordained for sucli occasional and isolated objects, is not reconcileable witli just ideas of divine providence.
 

Other books

The Tailgate by Elin Hilderbrand
Hungry Like the Wolf by Paige Tyler
Deathwatch by Dana Marton
Echoes by Christine Grey
How to Cook a Moose by Kate Christensen
After the Fall by Kylie Ladd
Princess From the Past by Caitlin Crews