that Joseph and Mary immediately after that event returned to Nazareth to settle their affairs, and then removed to Bethlehem. They might think the education of their Son in that village, in which his birth had been providentially brought to pass, was necessary to his acknowledgment as the Messiah; and we know that they would have fixed there on their return, if God had not interfered to prevent it. The age of the children marked out for death seems to require, that Jesus should be at the time of the command at least entering upon his second year; for if he had been born only twelve or forty days, it seems that even so cruel a tyrant as Herod would not have been guilty of such a wanton act, as to put to death those among whom the object of his alarm could not have been included.

The enquiries of the Magi in the capital of Judæa with reason alarmed Herod, who was hated by his subjects, upheld only by a foreign power, and could claim no title to the crown; and it is added, all Jerusalem with him, for the Jews believed that the reign of the Messiah would be ushered in by a train of calamitous events. The expectation too of the birth of one who was not only to be the King of the Jews, but an universal Sovereign, had been for some time prevalent both in the East and West. Virgil, in almost the same terms as Isaiah, describes the happy reign of a new progeny from heaven, which he applies to the new-born son of the Consul Pollio. This prophecy excited the ambition of Lentulus, and engaged him in Cataline's conspiracy; and Suetonius, in his life of Vespasian, remarks, that it was an ancient and constant opinion throughout the East, that sovereignty should belong to one who came out of Judæa. Tacitus, H. v. 13. reports, that many were persuaded that it was recorded in the ancient writings of the priests, that Oriens valesceret, the East should prevail, a remarkable expression, taken no doubt from the Prophets; for the word Zech. iii. 8. we render Branch, the Septuagint translates 'Avaroλ, and the Vulgate Oriens, a title which in either sense can only be justly claimed by the offspring of David, who is

that Sun of righteousness, to whose light the Gentiles should come, and kings to the brightness of his rising. Isaiah lx. 3.

By an inconsistent yet not unexampled mixture of belief in prophecy, and the hope of defeating it, he first ascertained from a council of the priests and scribes, that Bethlehem was the birth-place of the true King of Israel, and then planned his destruction. The Magi acted upon the information obtained at Jerusalem, and as they were on their way to Bethlehem, the star again appeared, and standing over the house where the babe was, precluded the possibility of mistake. This decides that it could not have been a star properly so called, but a meteor, moving at no great height. Their joy is expressed by the Evangelist in the strongest terms; and we find that they were not scandalized at the total absence of all the splendour that is expected to accompany royalty, but did homage, nothing doubting, to the infant King, whom they came to honour, presenting him with gold, frankincense, and myrrh; which the fathers explain, perhaps fancifully, as indicating the first his sovereignty, the second his divinity, and the third his human nature. Thus Jesus was acknowledged as a King in the place of his nativity by a chosen few of Jews and Gentiles, by the shepherds, and the Magi. Herod's craftiness seems to have deserted him on this occasion. By trusting to their fidelity, instead of sending persons with them, who might have been spies upon them, his plan was frustrated; for though their intention was to return to Jerusalem, it was altered in consequence of a Divine intimation. Herod, exasperated by disappointment, put to death all the male children in Bethlehem and its neighbourhood, who might be supposed to have been born since the time mentioned. But the atrocious measure which he commanded, only plunged him deeper into guilt; for the infant he sought to slay was not to die before the appointed time, or by any but the appointed instruments, and was safe in Egypt; an angel, probably Gabriel, having previously warned Joseph to retire there with his wife and her child. Thus Mary's espousals with him had been the means of

raising up a protector for them in the ordinary course fof events; and the oblations of the eastern sages enabled them to bear the expense of a journey, and of a residence in a foreign land. The place of their abode is not known, but, as Egypt then abounded with Jews, their situation was less uncomfortable than it would otherwise have been their stay also was very short; for, upon Herod's death a few months after, they returned, according to the instructions conveyed to them by an angel, but not as they intended, to Bethlehem, then in the dominions of his eldest surviving son Archelaus, but to Nazareth, in those of his brother Herod Antipas, the original home of Joseph.

14. Jesus, when twelve years of age, questions and answers the doctors in the temple. Luke ii.

Here the Saviour grew up in obscurity, his birth-place unknown to the nation at large, and the remarkable circumstances which pointed out his real dignity having been shown only to a few chosen witnesses of Jewish and Gentile extraction. It is said, that he grew strong in spirit, and was filled with wisdom; but how and by what degrees the indwelling Deity communicated wisdom and holiness to his human nature, it is unprofitable, and seems to be presumptuous, to conjecture. It is natural to desire to know some particulars of the Saviour's childhood; and the authors of the false gospels undertake to gratify this wish. The anecdotes they detail, however, are so absurd, that they carry with them their own refutation; and it appears that the information we wish was not really expedient for us, since it has been withheld. St. John could, if he had pleased, have given us from the Virgin a minute account; but his object, and that of all the Evangelists, was the public ministry, not the private life, of the Saviour. We know in general, that he was obedient to Joseph and Mary, and it is probable that he assisted Joseph in his trade, being called the Carpenter, (Mark vi. 13.) and tradition reports that he made ploughs and yokes. Only a single incident of his youth is preserved. Joseph, as a conscientious Israelite,

went up yearly to Jerusalem to keep the passover, and his wife was in the habit of accompanying him, although the law did not require the attendance of females. When Jesus was twelve years old, he went up with them, and his age is mentioned, because that at which it was customary to admit youths into the congregation by some ceremony, corresponding to Confirmation in the Christian Church. The festival being over, they returned, and journeying in a company, as is still the custom of the east, did not, till families separated for the night, discover that he had remained behind. They went back to Jerusalem in quest of him, where they found him in some court or chamber of the temple, questioning the teachers of the law, and answering them, which he did with such wisdom and propriety, as to astonish all who heard him. The common notion, that he disputed with the doctors, derived from some commentators, and strengthened by paintings, receives no countenance from the text. His reply, How is it that ye sought me? Know ye not that I ought to be in my Father's house? seems to intimate reproof, as if they had not been sufficiently attentive to the various circumstances that designated his future office, and rebukes her for calling Joseph his father.

The whole of the preceding history has been boldly rejected by modern Anti-Trinitarians, and is unfairly printed in their new version in Italics, as if it were of doubtful authority. I say unfairly, because these chapters have been found in all unmutilated manuscripts and versions, and the facts they contain are referred to by the earliest Christian authors, and the earliest opponents of Christianity. It also deserves to be considered, that a prominent topic of discussion between those who favoured and those who opposed Jesus, was, the place of his birth, and the only proof of his birth in David's town lies in these chapters, which the Unitarians would explode, nor without them could we show that he was of the lineage of David. The phrase also èv dè Taïs hμegaïs, like ἐν ἔτει δὲ πέντε καὶ δέκατῳ in Luke, with which they would begin the Gospel, implies that something had preceded; nor

would Matthew have said, (iv. 13.) Jesus leaving Nazareth, unless he had mentioned before, (ii. 13.) that he came and dwelt there. The internal objections, then, are the only ones worthy of notice; the fabulous nature, as it is assumed, of the narrative, and the mode in which prophecy is applied. But these will not justify our rejection of what the whole Christian world, till our own days, has agreed to receive as Scripture. It is argued, that the massacre at Bethlehem must be a fabrication, because unnoticed by historians: but Josephus, the only author who could be expected to record it, compiles his narrative from the partial account of Herod's minister Nicolaus, and therefore is likely to be silent. The transaction too, however horrible, might not be of sufficient notoriety or importance to find its way into history. Michaelis estimates the number slain under twenty; but, without affecting an accuracy for which we have not sufficient data, we may observe, that Bethlehem was a small place, that the infants slain were not above two years old, and of the male sex only, and that several might escape. We know that Herod, who had already put to death his wife and three sons, made it his dying request to his sister, that on his decease there should be a general slaughter of the principal persons in the nation, that those who would otherwise have rejoiced at his funeral, might be compelled to mourn. Surely then we need have no scruple in believing, that such a wretch would command any crime, that could gratify his resentment or strengthen his authority. We have a remarkable instance not long before, of a similar design of atrocity, which, though not put into execution, was only prevented by selfishness; and it deserves our notice, that the suggestion arose out of the very same cause. Suetonius informs us, (Augustus 94,) that the same year in which Augustus was born, a Sibylline oracle made a great noise, that nature was about to bring forth a king to the Romans; which so terrified the Senate, that they made a decree, to expose all boys born that year; but those Senators whose wives were with child, because each appropriated to himself this expectation, took care that the decree should not