Read the Gospel of Matthew from the Synodal translation. New Testament: Gospel of Matthew

John Chrysostom St.

1 Genealogy of Jesus Christ, Son of David, Son of Abraham.

Do you remember the instruction that we recently gave you, asking you to listen to everything that is said with deep silence and reverent silence? Today we must enter the sacred vestibule; That’s why I remind you of this instruction. If the Jews, when it was necessary for them to approach the burning mountain, to " fire, darkness, gloom and storm", or better yet, not even to begin, but to see and hear everything from afar; for three more days it was ordered to refrain from communicating with the wives and to wash their clothes, if they themselves, as well as Moses, were in fear and trembling, - then all the more must we show the highest wisdom when we must hear such great words and not appear from afar as a smoking mountain, but ascend to heaven itself: we must not wash our clothes, but cleanse the garment of our soul and free ourselves from all worldly impurities. You will not see darkness , not smoke, not a storm, but the King himself, sitting on the throne of His ineffable glory, the angels and archangels standing before Him, and the host of saints with countless thousands of heavenly armies. Such is the city of God, containing within itself the church of the firstborn, the spirits of the righteous, the triumphant assembly of angels, the blood of sprinkling, through which everything is united, heaven has received the earthly, the earth has received the heavenly, the peace long desired for angels and saints has come.In this city the brilliant and glorious banner of the cross is hoisted: there is the spoil of Christ, the firstfruits of our nature, the acquisitions of our King. We learn about all this with certainty from the gospels. And if you follow us with due calm, we will be able to take you everywhere and show you where death lies nailed (to the cross), where sin is hanged, where there are numerous and wondrous monuments of this war, this battle. You will see there the bound tormentor, accompanied by a crowd of captives, and that stronghold from where this vile demon in former times carried out his raids everywhere; You will see the robber’s refuges and caves, already destroyed and open, because the King came there too. Don't get tired, beloved! You cannot listen enough if someone tells you about an ordinary war, about trophies and victories, and you would not prefer such a story to food or drink. If you like this story so much, then mine is much more pleasant. Imagine, in fact, what it’s like to hear how God, having risen from heaven and royal thrones, descended to earth and into hell itself, how He took up arms in battle, how the devil fought with God - not with the undisguised God, however, but with God, hiding under the cover of human flesh. And, amazingly, you will see how death is destroyed by death, how an oath is abolished by an oath, how the torment of the devil is overthrown by the very thing through which he acquired power. So, let us wake up and not indulge in slumber! I can already see how the gates are opening before us. Let us enter with complete decorum and trepidation. Now we are entering the very threshold. What kind of threshold is this? " Book of the kinship of Jesus Christ, son of David, son of Abraham" (1 Genealogy of Jesus Christ, Son of David, Son of Abraham. Matt. 1:1). What are you saying? You promised to talk about the only begotten Son of God, but you mention David, a man who existed after thousands of generations, and you call him father and ancestor? Wait, don’t try to find out everything at once, but learn gradually and little by little. You are still standing on the threshold, at the very threshold: why rush to the sanctuary? You haven't taken a good look at everything outside yet. And I am not yet telling you about the first - heavenly birth, or better yet, I am not even talking about the second - earthly, because it is inexplicable and ineffable. The prophet Isaiah also told you about this before me, when precisely, proclaiming the sufferings of the Lord and His great care for the universe, amazed by the sight of who He was and what He became, and where He descended, he loudly and clearly exclaimed: His generation who confess(8 He was taken from bondage and judgment; but who will explain His generation? for He is cut off from the land of the living; for the crimes of my people I suffered execution. Is. 53:8)? So, we are now talking not about that heavenly birth, but about this earthly birth, which had thousands of witnesses. Yes, and we will talk about him as much as we can according to the grace of the Spirit we have received. It is impossible to imagine this birth with all clarity, since it is also full of mystery. So, when you hear about this birth, do not think that you are hearing about something unimportant; but perk up your mind and be horrified when you hear that God has come to earth. It was so wondrous and wonderful that the angels, forming a crowd of praise, gave glory for it to the whole world, and the prophets long before were amazed that God appeared on earth and lived with people (38 After this He appeared on earth and spoke among people. Var. 3:38). And it is truly, extremely wonderful to hear that the ineffable, inexplicable and incomprehensible God, equal to the Father, came through a virgin’s womb, deigned to be born of a wife and have David and Abraham as ancestors. And what do I say - David and Abraham? What is even more amazing are those wives I mentioned earlier. Hearing this, perk up and do not suspect anything humiliating; on the contrary, especially marvel at this, that the Son of the beginningless Father, the true Son, deigned to be called the Son of David in order to make you the son of God, deigned to have a servant as His father, so that you, a slave, could make the Master a father. Do you see how the gospel is at the very beginning? If you doubt your sonship with God, then be confident in it by hearing what happened to Him. According to human reasoning, it is much more difficult for God to become a man than for a man to become the son of God. So, when you hear that the Son of God is the son of David and Abraham, then do not doubt that you, the son of Adam, will be the son of God. He would not have humbled Himself in vain and without purpose to such an extent if He did not want to exalt us. He was born according to the flesh, so that you might be born according to the Spirit; born of a wife, so that you may cease to be the son of a wife. That is why His birth was twofold - on the one hand, similar to ours, on the other, exceeding ours. By being born of a woman, He became like us; by the fact that He was born not of blood, not of the will of man or flesh, but of the Holy Spirit, He foretells the future birth that exceeds us, which He had to bestow upon us from the Spirit. It was the same with everything else. This was the case, for example, with baptism. And there was something old in it, there was also something new: baptism from the prophet showed the old, and the condescension of the Spirit signified the new. Just as someone, standing between two standing separately, stretches out his hands to both and joins them, so did the Son of God, uniting the old covenant with the new, the divine nature with the human, His own with ours. Do you see the shine of the city of God? Do you see how the brilliance shone upon you as you entered? Do you see how he immediately showed you the King in your image, as if in the middle of a camp? And here on earth, the king does not always appear in his greatness, but often, having put away his purple and diadem, puts on the clothes of a simple warrior. But the king of the earth does this so that, having become famous, he does not attract the enemy to himself; The King of Heaven, on the contrary, so that, having become known, he would not force the enemy to flee from fighting with Him and not lead His own into confusion, since He wanted to save, and not to frighten. That is why the evangelist immediately called Him by the appropriate name." Jesus". This name " Jesus"not Greek; He is called Jesus in Hebrew, which is Greek means Savior (Σωτηρ); He is called Savior because He saved His people. Do you see how the evangelist lifted up the listener, how he, speaking in ordinary words, revealed in them to all of us that which is beyond all hope? Both of these names were well known among the Jews. Since the events that were about to take place were marvelous, the names themselves were preceded by images, so that in this way any reason for grumbling about the innovation would be eliminated in advance. So the successor of Moses, who led the people into the promised land, is called Jesus. Do you see the image? Consider also the truth. This one led into the promised land, this one into heaven and to heavenly blessings; the one after the death of Moses, the other after the end of the law; this one is like a leader, this one is like a king. But so that you, hearing" Jesus", was not misled by the similarity of names, the evangelist added: Jesus Christ, son of David. That Jesus was not the son of David, but came from another tribe. But why does Matthew call his gospel " book of kinship of Jesus Christ", then how does it contain not only one genealogy, but also the entire economy? Because the birth of Christ is the main thing in the entire economy, it is the beginning and root of all the blessings given to us. Just as Moses calls his first work the book of the existence of heaven and earth, although it tells not only about heaven and earth, but also about what is between them, the evangelist named his book after the main thing done (for our salvation). Most amazing of all, beyond all hope and aspiration, indeed, is that God became man, and when this happened, everything that followed was both understandable and natural. But why didn’t the evangelist say first: son of Abraham, and then: son of David? Not because, as some people think, he wanted to present the genealogy in an ascending line - because then he would have done the same as Luke, but he does the opposite. So why did he mention David first? Because he was a man on everyone’s lips, both because of the celebrity of his deeds and because of his time, because he died much later than Abraham. Although God gave promises to both of them, little was said about the promise given to Abraham, as ancient, and the promise given to David, as recent and new, was repeated by everyone. The Jews themselves say: Is it not from the seed of David and from Bethlehem, where David is, that Christ will come? (42 Does not the Scripture say that Christ will come from the seed of David and from Bethlehem, from the place where David was? In. 7:42)? And no one called Him the son of Abraham, but everyone called Him the son of David, because both by the time of his life, as I have already said, and by the nobility of his reign, David was more remembered by everyone. That is why all the kings who lived after David, who were especially respected, were called by his name not only by the Jews, but also by God himself. So Ezekiel and other prophets say that David will come to them and rise again; they do not mean the dead David, but those imitating his virtue. This is what God says to Hezekiah: I will defend this city for My sake and for David's sake for My servant's sake.(34 I will guard this city to save it for My own sake and for the sake of David My servant." 2 Kings 19:34); and he said to Solomon that for David’s sake he did not divide the kingdom during his lifetime ( 34 I will not take the whole kingdom out of his hand, but I will leave him as ruler all the days of his life for the sake of David my servant, whom I have chosen, who kept my commandments and my statutes; 1 Kings 11:34). The glory of this man was great both before God and before people. That is why the evangelist directly begins the genealogy with the most noble, and then turns to the most ancient ancestor - Abraham, but finds it unnecessary for the Jews to build the genealogy further. These two husbands aroused particular surprise; one as prophet and king, the other as patriarch and prophet. But where is it clear, you ask, that Christ comes from David? If He was born not from a husband, but from only one wife, and the evangelist does not have the genealogy of the Virgin, then why can we know that Christ was a descendant of David? There are two questions here: why is the genealogy of the Mother not given, and why is Joseph specifically mentioned, who was not at all involved in the birth? Apparently, the latter is unnecessary, while the former would be required. What needs to be decided first? The question of the Virgin's descent from David. So how can we know that she comes from David? Listen: God commands Gabriel to go to the Virgin, betrothed to a man whose name is Joseph, from the house and fatherland of David (27 to a virgin betrothed to a man named Joseph, of the house of David; The name of the Virgin is: Mary. OK. 1:27). What do you want more clearly than this when you hear that the Virgin was from the house and fatherland of David? From here it is clear that Joseph came from the same family, because there was a law that commanded that a wife should not be taken other than from his own tribe. And Patriarch Jacob predicted that Christ would rise from the tribe of Judah, saying this: the prince from Judah and the leader from his feet will not fail until what is set aside for Him comes: and Toy aspiration of languages(10 The scepter will not depart from Judah, nor the lawgiver from between his feet, until the Reconciler comes, and to Him is the subjection of the nations. Life 49:10). This prophecy, you say, really shows that Christ was from the tribe of Judah; but that He also came from the line of David does not yet show this. Was there not a single clan in the tribe of Judah other than David? No, there were many other clans, and one could belong to the tribe of Judah, but not yet come from the clan of David. So that you do not say this, the evangelist resolves your doubt by saying that Christ was from the house and fatherland of David. If you want to verify this in a different way, then we will not hesitate to provide other evidence. The Jews were not allowed to take a wife not only from another tribe, but also from another clan or tribe. Therefore, whether we apply the words: from the house and fatherland of David to the Virgin, what was said remains undoubted; Whether we apply it to Joseph, what was said about him will also apply to the Virgin. If Joseph was from the house and fatherland of David, then he took a wife not from another family, but from the same one from which he himself came. But what if he broke the law, you say? The Evangelist forestalled this objection, testifying that Joseph was righteous, so that, knowing his virtue, you can be sure that he would not have broken the law. Being so meek and alien to passion that even motivated by suspicion he did not want to punish the Virgin, would he really have broken the law for the sake of carnal pleasure? Thinking above the law (since letting go and letting go secretly was characteristic of a person who thought above the law), would he really have done something contrary to the law, and, moreover, without any incentive? So, from what has been said it is clear that the Virgin came from the family of David. Now it should be said why the evangelist gave not Her genealogy, but Joseph’s. So why? The Jews did not have the custom of conducting genealogy through the female line; therefore, in order to observe the custom and not be found to be a violator at the very beginning, and on the other hand, to show us the origin of the Virgin, the evangelist, keeping silent about Her ancestors, presented the genealogy of Joseph. If he had presented the genealogy of the Virgin, it would have been considered an innovation; if he had kept silent about Joseph, we would not have known the ancestors of the Virgin. So, so that we know who Mary was, where she came from, and at the same time the custom was not violated, the evangelist presented the genealogy of Her betrothed and showed that he comes from the house of David. And since this is proven, it is also proven that the Virgin was from the same family, because this righteous man, as I said above, would not allow himself to take a wife from someone else’s family. It is possible, however, to point out another reason, more mysterious, why the Virgo’s ancestors are kept silent; but now is not the time to open it, because much has already been said. So, having finished the analysis of the questions here, let us try to remember with precision what was explained to us, namely: why David was mentioned first, why the evangelist called his book the book of kinship, why he added: “ Jesus Christ", in what ways the birth of Christ was similar to ours, and in what ways it was not similar, how the origin of Mary from David is proven, why the genealogy of Joseph is presented and is silent about the ancestors of the Virgin. If you preserve all this, then arouse in us greater zeal for further explanations ; and if you are careless and forget, then we will be less willing to explain the rest. After all, even a farmer will not want to take care of the seeds if the soil destroys what he sown before. So, I ask you to take care of what has been said. From such activities a great and saving good comes for the soul. By taking care of such activities, we can please God, and our lips, when we exercise them with spiritual conversations, will be clean from reproaches, obscenities and curses. We will also be terrible for demons when we arm our tongue with such conversations; to a greater extent Let us also attract to ourselves the grace of God; our gaze will become more penetrating. God has given us eyes, and mouth, and hearing, so that all our members may serve Him, so that we may say what is pleasing to Him, so that we may do what is pleasing to Him, so that we may sing to Him unceasingly. songs of praise so that they may send thanksgiving and thus clear their conscience. Just as the body, enjoying clean air, becomes healthier, so the soul, nourished by such activities, becomes wiser. Have you noticed that even from the eyes of the body, if they are constantly in the smoke, tears always flow, but in the fresh air, in the meadow, at springs and in gardens they become healthier and sharper. The same thing happens with the eye of the soul. If it feeds on the meadow of spiritual teachings, then it becomes pure, clear and insightful, and if it plunges into the smoke of everyday worries, then it will constantly sharpen and shed tears both in this and in the future life. Truly, human deeds are like smoke. That's why someone said: my days vanished like smoke(4 For my days are gone like smoke, and my bones are burned like a brand; Ps. 101:4). But the prophet wanted to express with these words only the idea of ​​​​the brevity and impermanence of human life, and I would say that they should be understood not only in this sense, but also as an indication of the rebelliousness of life. Indeed, nothing depresses and disturbs the spiritual eye more than a crowd of everyday worries and a swarm of wishes; this is the firewood of the said smoke. Just as an ordinary fire, engulfing a damp and wet substance, produces thick smoke, so a strong fiery passion, taking possession of a sluggish and weak soul, produces great smoke. That is why the dew of the Spirit and His light breeze are necessary to extinguish this fire, dispel this smoke, and give wings to our minds. It is impossible, impossible in any way, to soar to the sky, burdened with such evil. No; we need to be well girded to make this journey, or rather, it is impossible to do so if we do not take the wings of the Spirit. So, if we need both a light mind and the grace of the Spirit in order to ascend to this height, but we have none of this, if, on the contrary, we drag with us only the opposite and satanic weight, then how can we soar when such weight drags us down? If someone decided to weigh our words on the right scales, then in a thousand talents of everyday conversations he would hardly find even a hundred denarii of spiritual words, or rather, he would not find even ten ovols. Isn’t it a shame, isn’t it ridiculous to the extreme, that we, having a servant, usually use him for necessary things, but knowing the language, we don’t even treat our own member like a servant, but, on the contrary, use it for useless things? and in vain? Yes, if only for vain! And we make a nasty and harmful use out of it, from which we have no benefit. If what we say were useful for us, then our speeches would, of course, be pleasing to God. Meanwhile, we only say what the devil suggests: sometimes we mock, sometimes we say wit; sometimes we curse and offend, sometimes we swear, lie and break oaths; sometimes we don’t want to say a word out of frustration, sometimes we talk idle talk and chatter worse than old women, talking about things that don’t concern us at all. Which of you present here, tell me, if asked, can read at least one psalm or some other place from the Holy Scriptures? No one! And not only this is surprising, but also the fact that you, being so lazy in spiritual matters, turn out to be faster than fire in satanic matters. If anyone decides to ask you about the songs of the devil, about the melodies of debauchery and voluptuousness, he will find that many know them perfectly and will sing them with complete pleasure. And how do you justify yourself if you start blaming them? They say I am not a monk, but I have a wife and children, and I take care of the house. This is precisely where all the harm comes from, that you think that reading the Divine Scripture belongs only to monks, while you yourself need it much more than they do. Those who live in the world and receive new wounds every day especially need medicine. Therefore, considering reading Scripture unnecessary is much worse than not reading it. Such a thought is a satanic suggestion. Do you not hear how Paul says that all these things were written for our teaching? 11 All this happened to them, How images; but it is described for the instruction of us who have reached the last centuries. 1 Cor. 10:11)? And you, who dare not take up the gospel with unwashed hands, do you not think that what it contains is extremely important? That's why everything goes topsy-turvy. If you want to know how great the benefit of Scripture is, watch yourself what happens to you when you listen to the psalms, and what happens when you listen to a satanic song; in what position you spend time in church, and in what position you sit in the theater. Then you will see the difference between one and the other state of the soul, although the soul is the same. That's why Paul said: customs are corrupted, good conversations are evil(53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. 1 Cor. 15:53). This is why we constantly need spiritual chants. This is where our superiority over dumb animals lies, although in other respects we are significantly inferior to them. This is the food of the soul, this is its decoration, this is its protection; on the contrary, not listening to Scripture is hunger and destruction for the soul. I will give them, says the Lord, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but a famine of hearing the word of the Lord. (11 Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord God, when I will send a famine on the earth—not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but a thirst for hearing the words of the Lord. Am. 8:11). Could anything be more disastrous when you bring upon your own head the evil that God threatens as punishment, tormenting your soul with terrible hunger and making it weaker than anything in the world? Usually the word both spoils the soul and heals it; the word arouses anger in her, and it again tames her; a shameful word incites lust, a decent word disposes to chastity. If the word has such power at all, then how, tell me, do you neglect the Scripture? If simple exhortation is so powerful, then exhortation accompanied by the work of the Spirit is much more effective. A word spoken from the Divine Scripture is stronger than fire, softening a hardened soul and making it capable of everything beautiful. By this means, Paul, when he learned about the Corinthians that they had become proud and arrogant, humbled them and made them more humble. They were proud of what they should have considered shame and disgrace. But listen, what a change took place in them when they received the message. The teacher himself testified about it when he told them: This is the very thing that God will offend you, because it has created in you diligence, but response, but indignation, but fear, but lust, but jealousy, but vengeance (11 For the very fact that you were grieved for God's sake, see what zeal has produced in you, what apologies, what indignation on the culprit, what fear, what desire, what jealousy, what retribution! By all accounts, you have shown yourself to be clean in this matter. 2 Cor. 7:11). By this means we can control servants, children, wives, and friends; We can make enemies friends. In this way, great men, friends of God, achieved perfection. So David, after committing a sin, as soon as he heeded the word, immediately showed in himself the most beautiful example of repentance ( 13 And David said to Nathan, “I have sinned against the Lord.” And Nathan said to David: And the Lord has taken away thy sin from thee; you will not die; 2 Kings 12:13) and the apostles, with the help of the word, became what they were later, and through the word they converted the whole universe. But what, you say, is the benefit when someone listens and does not do what they tell him? There will be no small benefit from just one hearing. By at least a person will recognize himself, grieve, and someday he will come to the point where he will fulfill what he has heard. And who does not even know that he is sinning, will he ever stop sinning? Can one come to knowledge of oneself? So let us not neglect listening to the Holy Scriptures. This is the devil's intention - not to allow us to see the treasures, so that we do not become rich. He is afraid that our hearing will turn into action; That’s why it inspires us that listening alone has no meaning. So, knowing this evil plan of his, let us protect ourselves on all sides, so that, defending ourselves with the weapon of the word of God, we not only avoid being captured ourselves, but also crush his head, and, thus crowned with victorious signs, achieve future blessings through the grace and love of God of the Lord our Jesus Christ, to whom be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen.

Source

2 Abraham gave birth to Isaac; Isaac gave birth to Jacob; Jacob begat Judah and his brothers;

What is our question now? About why the evangelist presents the genealogy of Joseph, who was not at all involved in the birth of Christ. We have already indicated one reason; it is necessary to discover another, which is more mysterious and intimate than the first. What is this reason? The Evangelist did not want the Jews to know at birth that Christ was born of a Virgin. But do not be embarrassed if what I have said is scary to you; I speak here not my own words, but the words of our fathers, wonderful and famous men. If the Lord initially hid much in darkness, calling Himself the son of man; If He did not clearly reveal to us His equality with the Father everywhere, then why should we be surprised if He hid for the time being His birth from the Virgin, creating something wonderful and great? What's so wonderful here, you say? The fact that Virgo is preserved and freed from evil suspicion. Otherwise, if this had become known to the Jews from the very beginning, they, having interpreted the words for the worse, would have stoned the Virgin and condemned her as a harlot. If even in such cases, examples of which they often encountered back in the Old Testament, they revealed their shamelessness (for example, they called Christ mad when He cast out demons, they considered Him an adversary to God when He healed the sick on the Sabbath, despite the fact that The Sabbath had already been broken many times before), then what wouldn’t they say when they heard about it? They were also favored by the fact that nothing like this had ever happened before. If even after His many miracles they called Jesus the son of Joseph, how could they have believed, even before the miracles, that He was born of a Virgin? That is why the genealogy of Joseph is written, and the Virgin is betrothed to him. When even Joseph, a righteous and wondrous man, needed many proofs to believe such an event - the appearance of an angel, a dream vision, the testimony of the prophets - then how could the Jews, a rude and corrupt people, and so hostile, accept such a thought? to Christ? Without a doubt, they would be extremely outraged by such an unusual and new event, when they had never even heard of something similar happening among their ancestors. Anyone who once believed that Jesus is the Son of God would no longer doubt it. But whoever considers Him a flatterer and an adversary to God, how would he not be even more tempted by this and would not have the indicated suspicion? That is why the apostles do not talk about the birth from the Virgin from the very beginning. On the contrary, they often talk a lot about the resurrection of Christ, because there were examples of the resurrection in previous times, although not like this; and they rarely talk about His birth from the Virgin. Even His Mother herself did not dare to announce this. Look what the Virgin says to Christ himself: behold, I and Thy father petitioned Thee (48 And when they saw Him, they were surprised; and His Mother said to Him: Child! what have you done to us? Behold, Your father and I have been looking for You with great sorrow. OK. 2:48)! Considering Him to be born of a Virgin, they would no longer recognize Him as the Son of David; and from here many other evils would occur. That is why the angels announced this only to Mary and Joseph; when they preached the news of the birth to the shepherds, they did not add anything about it. But why does the evangelist, having mentioned Abraham and said that he gave birth to Isaac, and Isaac to Jacob, does not mention the latter’s brother, while after Jacob he mentions both Judas and his brothers? Some blame Esau's evil behavior as the reason for this, and they say the same about some other ancestors. But I won’t say this: if this were so, then why does the evangelist mention vicious wives a little later? Obviously, here the glory of Jesus Christ is revealed through contrast, not through greatness, but through the insignificance and baseness of His ancestors. It is great glory for a high man if he can humiliate himself to the extreme. So why didn't the evangelist mention Esau and the others? Because the Saracens and Ishmaelites, the Arabs and everyone who descended from those ancestors had nothing in common with the people of Israel. That’s why he kept silent about them, but turned directly to the ancestors of Jesus and the Jewish people, saying: “ And Jacob begat Judah and his brethren". Here the Jewish race is already signified.

3 Judah fathered Perez and Zerah by Tamar; Perez begat Hezrom; Hezrom begat Aram;

What are you doing, inspired man, reminding us of the history of lawless incest? What's wrong with that? he answers. If we began to list the genus of any ordinary person, then it would be decent to remain silent about such a matter. But in the genealogy of the incarnate God, not only should one not remain silent, but one should also announce this loudly, in order to show His providence and power. He came not to avoid our shame, but to destroy it. Just as we are especially surprised not by the fact that Christ died, but by the fact that he was crucified (although this is blasphemous, but the more blasphemous, the more love for mankind is shown in Him), the same can be said about His birth: Christ should be surprised not only because He took on flesh and became a man, but also because He deigned to be His relatives, not at all ashamed of our vices. Thus, from the very beginning of His birth, He showed that He did not disdain anything of ours, thereby teaching us not to be ashamed of the evil behavior of our ancestors, but to seek only one thing - virtue. A virtuous person, even if he came from a foreigner, even if he was born from a harlot or some other sinner, cannot receive any harm from this. If the fornicator himself, if he changes, is not in the least disgraced by his former life, then much less can a virtuous person, if he is descended from a harlot or an adulteress, be in the least disgraced by the depravity of his parents. However, Christ did this not only for our teaching, but also to tame the pride of the Jews. Since they, not caring about spiritual virtue, in any case extolled themselves only by Abraham, and thought to be justified by the virtue of their ancestors, the Lord shows from the very beginning that one should boast not of one’s family, but of one’s own merits. Moreover, He also wants to show that everyone, including the forefathers themselves, are guilty of sins. Thus, the patriarch, from whom the Jewish people received their very name, turns out to be no small sinner: Tamar accuses him of fornication. And David begat Solomon from an adulterous wife. If such great men did not fulfill the law, then much less those who were lower than them. And if they did not fulfill it, then everyone sinned, and the coming of Christ was necessary. For this reason, the evangelist also mentioned the twelve patriarchs in order to humiliate the Jews, who were extolled by their famous ancestors. After all, many of the patriarchs were born of slaves, and yet the difference in those who gave birth did not make a difference between those born. All of them were equally patriarchs and ancestors of the tribes. This is the advantage of the Church; This is the difference between our nobility, typified in the Old Testament. Even if you were a slave, even if you were free, this would neither benefit nor harm you; Only one thing is required - will and spiritual disposition. In addition to what has been said, there is another reason why the evangelist mentioned the story of Judas’ incest. Not without purpose, Zara was added to Fares. Apparently, it would be in vain and unnecessary to mention Dawn after Peres, from whom the genealogy of Christ was to be traced. What is this mentioned for? When the time came for Tamar to give birth to them and the illnesses began, Zara was the first to show his hand. The midwife, seeing this, in order to notice the firstborn, bandaged his hand red thread. When the hand was bandaged, the baby hid it, and then Peres was born, and then Zara. Seeing this, the midwife said: (29 But he returned his hand; and behold, his brother came out. And she said: how did you dissolve your barrier? And his name was called Perez. Life 38:29)? Do you notice a mysterious prototype? It is not without reason that this was written for us, since it would not be worth telling about what the midwife once said and telling that the second-born was the first to put out his hand. So what does this foreshadowing mean? First, the baby's name resolves this issue: Fares means division and dissection. Secondly, the event itself: it did not happen according to natural order that the hand that appeared, being bandaged, was hidden again. There was no intelligent movement or natural order here. To be born to another when one has shown his hand is perhaps natural; but to hide it in order to make way for another is already inconsistent with the law of those born. No, the grace of God was present here, which arranged the birth of babies, and through them predetermined for us some image of future events. What exactly? Those who have carefully delved into this incident say that these babies prefigured two nations. Then, so that you know that the existence of the second people precedes the origin of the first, the baby does not show himself in full, but only stretches out his hand, but again hides it, and only after his brother has fully come into the world, and he appears in full. This is what happened to both people. First, during the time of Abraham, church life appeared, then, when it was hidden, the Jewish people emerged with a life under the law, and after that a whole new people appeared with their own laws. That is why the midwife says: why did you stop the obstacle? The coming law suppressed freedom of life. And Scripture usually calls the law a barrier. So the prophet David says: you have overthrown the stronghold(obstruction) he is embraced by everyone passing by (13 Why have you broken down its walls, so that all who pass along the way tear it down? Ps. 79:13). And Isaiah: protect him with a fence (2 And he surrounded it with a fence, and cleared it of stones, and planted choice vines in it, and built a tower in the midst of it, and dug a winepress in it, and expected it to bring forth good grapes, but it brought forth wild grapes. Is. 5:2). And Pavel: and the mediastinum fence is ruinous (14 For He is our peace, having made both one and destroyed the barrier that stood in the middle, Eph. 2:14). Others argue that the words: that I stopped you for the sake of an obstacle? spoken of the new people, since by their appearance they abolished the law. Do you see that it was not for a few and unimportant reasons that the evangelist mentioned the whole story of Judas? For the same reason, Ruth and Rahab are mentioned, one of whom was a foreigner, and the other a harlot, i.e., to teach you that the Savior came to destroy all our sins, came as a doctor, and not as a judge. Just as they took harlots into marriage, so God combined with Himself the adulterous nature. The prophets of old applied this to the synagogue; but she turned out to be ungrateful to her Husband. On the contrary, the Church, once freed from paternal vices, remained in the arms of the Bridegroom. Look at the similarities in Ruth’s adventures with ours. She was a foreigner and reduced to extreme poverty, and yet Boaz, who saw her, did not despise her poverty, and did not disdain her low origin. In the same way, Christ, who accepted the Church as foreign and very impoverished, made it a participant in great blessings. And just as she would never have entered into such a marriage if she had not left her father in advance, and had not despised her home, clan, fatherland and relatives, so the Church, when it left its paternal morals, then became dear to the Bridegroom. The prophet, addressing the Church, says about this: forget your people and your father's house, and the King will desire your kindness (11 Hear, daughter, and see, and incline your ear, and forget your people and your father’s house. Ps. 44:11, 12). Ruth also did this, and through this the matter of kings was made, as well as the Church, because David came from her. So, the evangelist compiled a genealogy and placed these wives in it in order to shame the Jews with such examples and teach them not to be arrogant. Ruth was the ancestor of a great king, and David is not ashamed of this. It is impossible, absolutely impossible, to be honest or dishonest, famous or unknown, through the virtues or vices of one’s ancestors. On the contrary, I must say - even if my words seemed strange - that he is more famous who, being born not from good parents, became good. So, let no one be proud of their ancestors; but, reflecting on the ancestors of the Lord, let him put aside all vanity and boast about his merits, or better yet, not boast about them. Because of his self-praise, the Pharisee became worse than the tax collector. If you want to show great virtue, do not be arrogant, and then you will show even greater virtue; Don’t think that once you’ve done something, you’ve already done everything. If we become righteous when, being sinners, we consider ourselves to be what we really are, as happened with the publican, how much more when, being righteous, we consider ourselves sinners? If humility makes sinners righteous, even if it was not humility, but sincere consciousness; and if sincere consciousness has such power in sinners, then look, what does humility not do in the righteous? So, do not waste your labors, do not let your sweat be shed in vain, and you, having run thousands of miles, lose all reward. The Lord knows your merits much better than you. If you give me the cup cold water, - He won’t despise that either. If you give one ovol, if you just sigh, He will accept everything with great favor, and remember, and determine great rewards for it. Why do you consider your virtues and constantly show them off to us? Or don’t you know that if you praise yourself, you will no longer be praised by God? Likewise, if you humiliate yourself, will He continually glorify you before everyone? He does not want to reduce the reward for your labors. What am I saying: reduce? He does and arranges everything to crown you even for little things, and he is looking for all sorts of excuses to save you from Gehenna. That is why, even if you have worked only at the eleventh hour of the day, the Lord will give you a full reward. “Although there is nothing to save you for,” He will say, “I do this for Myself, so that My name will not be defiled” (cf. 22 Therefore say to the house of Israel, Thus says the Lord God: I will not do this for you, O house of Israel, but for the sake of my holy name, which you have profaned among the nations where you have come. Ezek. 36:22, 32). If you just sigh, if you just shed a tear, He himself will immediately take advantage of all this as an opportunity for your salvation. So, let us not be arrogant, let us call ourselves indecent, so that we may be useful. If you yourself call yourself worthy of praise, then you are indecent, even if you really were worthy of praise; on the contrary, if you yourself call yourself indecent, you will become useful, even if you were unworthy of praise. That is why one should forget about one’s good deeds. But you say: how can you not know what we know completely? What are you saying? Do you constantly insult the Lord, live in bliss and joy, and do not know that you have sinned, consigning everything to oblivion, but cannot forget about your good deeds? Although fear is much stronger, the opposite happens to us: insulting God every day, we do not pay attention to it, and if we give even a small coin to the poor, we constantly rush about it. This is extreme madness, and the greatest damage to the one who collects. Forgetting your good deeds is their safest repository. And just as clothes and gold, if we lay them out at the market, attract many criminals, and if we remove and hide them at home, then they are kept in complete safety, so if we constantly keep our good deeds in memory, then we irritate the Lord, arm the enemy and we incite him to kidnap, and if no one knows them except the One Who should know, then they will be safe. So, do not constantly boast about your good deeds so that someone does not deprive you of them, so that the same thing does not happen to you as happened to the Pharisee, who carried them on his tongue, from where the devil stole them. Although he remembered them with thanksgiving and raised everything to God, this did not save him, because it is not proper for one who thanks God to revile others, to show his superiority over the majority and to be proud of himself before sinners. If you thank God, then be content with that alone; don’t talk about it to people, and don’t judge your neighbor, because this is no longer a matter of gratitude. Do you want to know how to express gratitude? Listen to what the three youths say: a sinner and a lawless one (29 For we have sinned and done wrong in turning away from You, and have sinned in every way. Dan. 3:29); Thou art righteous, O Lord, for all that thou hast done for us (27 For You are righteous in all that You have done to us, and all Your works are true, and Your ways are right, and all Your judgments are true. Dan. 3:27), as if you brought all true judgment (31 And all that You brought upon us, and all that You did to us, You did according to true judgment. Dan. 3:31). Confessing your sins means thanking God; whoever confesses his sins shows that he is guilty of countless sins, and only has not received a worthy punishment. He is the one who thanks God the most. So, let us beware of praising ourselves for good, because this makes us both hateful before people and vile before God. Therefore, the more we do good, the less we will talk about ourselves. Only in this way can we acquire the greatest glory both from God and from people; or rather, God has not only glory, but also reward and great reward. So, do not demand a reward in order to receive a reward; Confess that you are saved by grace, so that God himself will recognize Himself as your debtor, not only for your good deeds, but also for your gratitude. When we do good, He owes us only for our deeds; and when we don’t even think that we have done any good deed, then He remains indebted to us for such our disposition, and moreover, than for our deeds - so that such our disposition is equal to the virtues themselves, and without it, even the deeds themselves not important. Likewise, we show favor to our servants, especially when they, while serving us with zeal in everything, think that they have not yet done anything important for us. So, if you also want your good deeds to be great, then do not consider them great, and then they will be great. So the centurion said: I am not worthy, but come under my roof (8 The centurion answered and said: Lord! I am not worthy for You to come under my roof, but just say the word, and my servant will recover; Matt. 8:8), and through this he became worthy, and deserved surprise more than all the Jews. This is what Paul said: I am not worthy to be called an apostle (9 For I am the least of the apostles, and am not worthy to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. 1 Cor. 15:9), and through this he became the first of all. So John said: I am not worthy to loose the thong of His boot (16 John answered everyone: I baptize you with water, but one mightier than me is coming, whose sandal strap I am not worthy to untie; He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. OK. 3:16), and for this he was a friend of the Bridegroom, and Christ placed that hand, which he considered unworthy to touch the boots, on His head. This is what Peter said: get away from me, for I am a sinner (8 Seeing this, Simon Peter fell at the knees of Jesus and said: Depart from me, Lord! because I am a sinful person. OK. 5:8), and for this he became the foundation of the Church. Truly, nothing pleases God more than if someone considers himself among the greatest sinners. This is the beginning of all wisdom: the humble and contrite will never be vain, nor angry, nor jealous of his neighbor, in a word, he will not harbor a single passion in himself. No matter how hard we try, we just can’t lift our broken hand; If we crush the soul in a similar way, then even if a thousand arrogant passions lift it up, it will not rise at all. If he who weeps over the affairs of life drives out all mental illnesses; then he who mourns his sins will become wiser much more. Who, you say, can crush his heart like that? Listen to David, who became especially famous for this, look at the contrition of his soul. When, having already accomplished many feats, he was in danger of losing his fatherland, home and life itself, and at the very moment of misfortune he saw that one low and despicable warrior was swearing at his misfortune and blaspheming him, not only did he not respond with curses, but he forbade and the commander who wanted to kill him, saying: leave him because the Lord commanded him 11 And David said to Abishai and to all his servants, Behold, if my son, which came out of my bowels, seeks my life, how much more is the son of Benjamite; leave him alone, let him curse, for the Lord has commanded him; 2 Kings 16:11). And another time, when the priests asked him for permission to carry the ark behind him, he did not agree, but what did he say? “Let him stand in the temple, and if God frees me from real troubles, I will see his beauty. But if he says, “I do not favor you,” behold, let him do what is right for me in His sight.” ( 25 And the king said to Zadok, Bring back the ark of God to the city [and let it stand in its place]. If I find mercy in the eyes of the Lord, He will return me and let me see him and his dwelling. 2 Kings 15:25) And what he did in relation to Saul, not once, not twice, but many times, what shows the height of wisdom? This behavior was above the old law, and approached the apostolic commandments. Therefore, he accepted everything from the Lord with love, without examining what was happening to him, but trying only to always obey and follow the laws given from Him. And after performing such great feats, seeing the kingdom that belonged to himself in the hands of a tormentor, parricide, fratricide, oppressor, raging man, he not only was not tempted by this, but said: if it pleases God, that I should be persecuted, wander and run, and my enemy was honored, then I accept it with love, and also give thanks for countless disasters. He did not act like many shameless and daring ones, who, without having accomplished even the slightest part of his exploits, barely see anyone in a prosperous state, and even though they are in slight sorrow, they destroy their soul with countless blasphemies. David was not like that, but he showed meekness in everything. That's why God said: found David, son of Jesse, a man after my heart ( 21 I found David my servant, and anointed him with my holy oil. Ps. 88:21). Let us also try to have such a soul, and whatever happens to us, we will endure it with meekness, and here, until we receive the kingdom, we will reap the fruits of humility. Learn from Mene, says the Lord, For I am meek and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls (29 Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls; Matt. 11:29). So, in order for us to enjoy peace both here and there, let us with all diligence instill in our souls the mother of all blessings, that is, humility. With the help of this virtue we can swim across the sea without worry. real life, and reach a quiet haven, through the grace and love of our Lord Jesus Christ, to whom be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen.

4 Aram gave birth to Abminadab; Amminadab begat Nahshon; Nahshon begat Salmon;

5 Salmon fathered Boaz by Rahab; Boaz fathered Obed by Ruth; Obed begat Jesse;

6 Jesse begat David king; David the king begot Solomon from Uriah;

7 Solomon begat Rehoboam; Rehoboam gave birth to Abijah; Abijah begat Asa;

8 Asa begat Jehoshaphat; Jehoshaphat begat Joram; Jehoram begat Uzziah;

9 Uzziah begat Jotham; Jotham begat Ahaz; Ahaz begat Hezekiah;

10 Hezekiah begat Manasseh; Manasseh begat Amun; Amon gave birth to Josiah;

11 Josiah begat Joachim; Joachim gave birth to Jeconiah and his brothers before moving to Babylon.

12 After moving to Babylon, Jeconiah gave birth to Salathiel; Shealtiel begat Zerubbabel;

13 Zerubbabel begat Abihu; Abihu begat Eliakim; Eliakim begat Azor;

14 Azor begat Zadok; Zadok gave birth to Achim; Achim begat Eliud;

15 Elihu begat Eleazar; Eleazar begat Matthan; Matthan gave birth to Jacob;

16 Jacob begat Joseph, the husband of Mary, from whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

17 So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; and from David to the deportation to Babylon, fourteen generations; and from the migration to Babylon to Christ there are fourteen generations.

The Evangelist divided the entire genealogy into three parts, wanting to show that the Jews did not become better with the change of government; but even during the aristocracy, and under the kings, and during the oligarchy, they indulged in the same vices: under the control of judges, priests and kings, they showed no success in virtue. But why did the evangelist omit three kings in the middle part of the genealogy, and in the last, placing twelve genealogy, said that there were fourteen of them? I leave the first to your own research, not considering it necessary to decide everything for you, so that you do not become lazy; Let's talk about the second one. It seems to me that he counts among the generations the time of captivity, and Jesus Christ himself, copulating Him with us everywhere. And by the way, he mentions the captivity, showing that the Jews did not become more prudent even in captivity, so that from everything the necessity of the coming of Christ was visible. But they will say: Why doesn’t Mark do the same, and doesn’t set out the genealogy of Jesus, but speaks about everything briefly? I think that Matthew wrote the gospel before others, which is why he sets out the genealogy with precision and dwells on the most important circumstances, and Mark wrote after him, why he observed brevity as narrating what had already been retold and became known. Why does Luke also set out his genealogy, and even more fully? Because he, meaning the Gospel of Matthew, wants to give us more information than Matthew. Moreover, each of them imitated the teacher - one Paul, who overflows like a river, and the other Peter, who loves brevity. And why didn’t Matthew, at the beginning of the Gospel, say, following the example of the prophets: the vision that I saw, or: the word that came to me? Because he wrote to well-meaning people, and those who were very attentive to him. And the former miracles confirmed to them what was written, and the readers were filled with faith. During the time of the prophets, there were not so many miracles that would confirm their preaching; on the contrary, many false prophets appeared, to whom the Jewish people more readily listened - which is why they needed to begin their prophecies in this way. And if miracles ever happened, they were for the pagans, so that they would turn to Judaism in greater numbers, and for the manifestation of the power of God, when the enemies, who subjugated the Jews to themselves, thought that they had defeated them by the power of their gods. This happened in Egypt, from where a multitude of people followed the Jews; These were the same afterward in Babylon - a miracle in the cave and dreams. However, there were miracles in the desert, when the Jews were there alone, as was the case with us; and many miracles were revealed to us when we emerged from error. But later, when piety was implanted everywhere, the miracles stopped. If the Jews had miracles after that, it was not large number and occasionally, somehow: when the sun stopped, and another time, when it retreated back. Again, we can see the same thing: in our time, with Julian, who surpassed everyone in wickedness, many miraculous things happened. When the Jews undertook the restoration of the Jerusalem temple, fire came out from under the foundation and prevented the work; and when Julian madly attempted to scold the sacred vessels, the keeper of the treasures and Julian’s uncle, who was named after him, the first died - eaten by worms, and the other sat on the floors. And it was a very important miracle that during the sacrifices there the springs dried up, and that during the reign of Julian the cities were overcome by famine. God usually performs signs when evil increases. When He sees that His servants are oppressed, and His opponents revel in tormenting them beyond measure, then He shows His own dominion. This is what He did with the Jews in Persia. So, from what has been said it is clear that the evangelist, not without reason and not by chance, divided the ancestors of Christ into three parts. Notice who he begins with and who he ends with. Starting with Abraham, he traces his genealogy to David; then from David to the Babylonian migration, and from the latter to Christ himself. Just as at the beginning of the entire genealogy I placed both David and Abraham side by side, so I precisely mentioned both at the end of the genealogy, because, as I said before, promises were given to them. Why, having mentioned the resettlement to Babylon, did he not mention the resettlement to Egypt? Because the Jews were no longer afraid of the Egyptians, but they were still in awe of the Babylonians, and because the first happened a long time ago, and the last recently; Moreover, they were taken to Egypt not for sins, but to Babylon for iniquities. If anyone wishes to delve into the meaning of the names themselves, then here too they will find many objects for contemplation, much that will serve to explain the new testament; These are the names of Abraham, Jacob, Solomon and Zerubbabel, since these names were not given to them without intention. But in order not to bore you with the duration, we will keep silent about this and get on with what is necessary. So, when the evangelist listed all the ancestors and ended with Joseph, he did not stop there, but added: Joseph's husband Mariin, showing that for Mary he mentioned Joseph in the genealogy. Then, lest you, having heard about Mary's husband, think that Jesus was born according to general law nature, see how he eliminates this thought with further words. You heard, he says, about the husband, you heard about the mother, you heard about the name given to the baby; Now listen to how He was born. Jesus Christ Christmas. Tell me, what birth are you talking about? You already told me about the ancestors. I want, says the evangelist, to talk about the image of birth. Do you see how he aroused the attention of the listener? As if intending to say something new, he promises to explain the image of birth. And notice what an excellent order there is in the story. He did not suddenly begin to talk about birth, but first reminds us who Christ was (in order of birth) from Abraham, who from David and from the migration to Babylon; and by this he encourages the listener to carefully examine the time, wanting to show that He is the very Christ who was foretold by the prophets. In fact, when you count the births and recognize by time that Jesus is definitely the Christ, then you will without difficulty believe the miracle that took place at the birth. Since the evangelist needed to talk about a great matter, which is the birth of the Virgin, then first, without proceeding to calculate time, he deliberately obscures the speech, mentioning Mary’s husband, and even interrupts the narration of the birth, and then already counts the years, reminding the listener , that the one who was born is the same one about whom the patriarch Jacob spoke, that He would appear during the impoverishment of the princes from Judah, and about Whom the prophet Daniel foretold that He would come after many weeks. And if anyone wants to calculate the years that the angel determined for Daniel by the number of weeks from the building of the city until the birth of Jesus, he will see that the time of His birth agrees with the prediction.

Source

18 The Nativity of Jesus Christ was like this: after the betrothal of His Mother Mary to Joseph, before they were united, it turned out that She was pregnant with the Holy Spirit.

He didn’t say: to the Virgin, but simply: to the Mother, so that the speech would be clearer. But having first brought the listener into the expectation of hearing something ordinary, and holding him in this expectation, he suddenly amazes him with the addition of the extraordinary, saying: before he had never even dreamed of it, he was found in the womb of the Holy Spirit. He did not say: before she was brought to the groom’s house, she was already living in his house, since the ancients were in the habit of keeping betrothed couples for the most part in their house, of which examples can still be seen today. And Lot's sons-in-law lived in Lot's house. So, Mary lived in the same house with Joseph. But why did She not conceive in the womb before the betrothal? So that, as I said at the beginning, conception would remain a secret for some time, and the Virgin would avoid any evil suspicion. He, who should have been jealous more than anyone else, not only does not send her away from him and does not dishonor her, but accepts her and provides her with services during pregnancy. But it is clear that, without being firmly convinced of conception through the action of the Holy Spirit, he would not have kept her with him and served her in everything. Moreover, the evangelist said very expressively: having been found in the womb, as is usually said about special events that happen beyond all expectations and unexpected. So, do not extend further, do not demand anything more than what has been said, and do not ask: how did the Spirit form the Child in the Virgin? If it is impossible to explain the method of conception during natural action, then how can it be explained when the Spirit worked miraculously? So that you would not bother the evangelist and not bother him with frequent questions about this, he freed himself from everything, naming the One who performed the miracle. I don’t know anything else, he says, but I only know that the event was accomplished by the power of the Holy Spirit. Let those who try to comprehend supernatural birth be ashamed! If no one can explain that birth, about which there are thousands of witnesses, which was foretold for so many centuries, which was visible and tangible, then to what extent are those who are crazy who curiously explore and carefully try to comprehend the ineffable birth? Neither Gabriel nor Matthew could say anything more than that what is born is of the Spirit; but how and in what way it was born of the Spirit, none of them explained this, because it was impossible. Nor do you think that you have learned everything when you hear that Christ was born of the Spirit. Having learned about this, we still don’t know much, for example: how does the uncontainable fit in the womb? How does the all-containing one move in the womb of his wife? How does a virgin give birth and remain a virgin? Tell me, how did the Spirit arrange this temple? How did he not receive all the flesh from the womb, but only part of it, which he then grew and formed? And what exactly came from the flesh of the Virgin, the evangelist clearly showed this with the words: born in her; and Paul in the words: born from a wife (4 But when the fullness of the time had come, God sent forth His [Only Begotten] Son, who was born of a woman, made subject to the law, Gal. 4:4). From the wife, he says, blocking the lips of those who claim that Christ passed through Mary, as if through some kind of pipe. If this is true, then was the virgin’s womb also necessary? If this is true, then Christ has nothing in common with us; on the contrary, His flesh is different from ours, not of the same composition. And how can we call Him then, having come from the root of Jesse? With a rod? Son of man? How to call Mary Matter? How can we say that Christ came from the seed of David? Did you take on the visage of a slave? What did the Word become flesh? Why did Paul say to the Romans: from them is Christ according to the flesh, who is God above all (5 theirs are the fathers, and from them is Christ according to the flesh, who is God over all, blessed forever, amen. Rome. 9:5)? From these words and from many other places of Scripture it is clear that Christ came from us, from our composition, from a virgin’s womb; but how, that is not visible. So, do not seek, but believe what is revealed, and do not try to comprehend what is silent.

19 Joseph, Her husband, being righteous and not wanting to make Her public, wanted to secretly let Her go.

Having said that (what is born of the Virgin) is from the Holy Spirit and without carnal copulation, he provides yet new evidence for this. Another might ask: how is this known? Who has seen or heard of anything like this ever happening? But so that you do not suspect the student that he invented this out of love for the Teacher, the evangelist introduces Joseph, who, by the very thing that happened in him, confirms your faith in what was said. The Evangelist seems to be saying this here: if you don’t believe me and suspect my testimony, then believe your husband. Joseph, speaks, her husband is righteous. Here he calls the one who has all the virtues righteous. Although to be righteous means not to appropriate someone else's property; but the totality of virtues is also called righteousness. It is in this particular sense that Scripture uses the word: righteousness, when, for example. speaks: a person is righteous, true (1 There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and this man was blameless, just and God-fearing and shunned evil. Job. 1:1), and also: besta both are righteous (6 They were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and statutes of the Lord blamelessly. OK. 1:6). So Joseph, being righteous, that is, kind and meek, if you want to let you in. For this reason, the evangelist describes what happened while Joseph was unaware, so that you would not doubt what happened after learning. Although the suspect not only deserved to be disgraced, but the law even commanded Her to be punished, Joseph spared Her not only from the greater, but also from the lesser, that is, from shame - he not only did not want to punish, but also to disgrace. Don't you recognize in him a wise man, and free from the most tormenting passion? You yourself know what jealousy is. That is why someone who fully knew this passion said: the husband's rage is filled with jealousy; will not spare on the day of judgment (34 For jealousy is the wrath of a man, and he will not spare on the day of vengeance, Proverbs 6:34). And jealousy is as cruel as hell (6 Place me like a seal on your heart like a ring on your hand: for love is strong as death; fierce, like hell, jealousy; her arrows are arrows of fire; she has a very strong flame. Song 8:6). And we know many who would rather lose their lives than be driven to suspicion and jealousy. And here there was no longer a simple suspicion: Mary was exposed to clear signs of pregnancy; and yet Joseph was so alien to passion that he did not want to cause the Virgin even the slightest grief. Since it seemed contrary to the law to keep Her with him, and to discover the matter and present Her to court meant to betray Her to death, he does neither one nor the other, but acts above the law. Truly, after the coming of grace, many signs of high wisdom were to appear. Just as the sun, not yet showing its rays, illuminates most of the universe from afar, so Christ, rising from the virgin’s womb, illuminated the entire universe before appearing. That is why, even before His birth, the prophets rejoiced, and the wives predicted the future, and John, not yet leaving the womb, leaped in the womb. And Joseph showed great wisdom here; he did not blame or blame the Virgin, but only intended to let Her go.

20 But when he thought this, behold, the Angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said: Joseph, son of David! Do not be afraid to accept Mary your wife, for what is born in Her is from the Holy Spirit;

When he was in such a difficult situation, an angel appears and resolves all perplexities. Here it is worthy of investigation why the angel did not come first, while the husband did not yet have such thoughts, but comes when he has already thought. I thought this to him, says the evangelist, and an angel comes; Meanwhile, the Virgin is preached the gospel even before conception, which again leads to new bewilderment. If the angel did not tell Joseph, then why did the Virgin, who heard from the angel, remain silent, and seeing her groom in confusion, did not resolve his bewilderment? So why didn't the angel tell Joseph before he was embarrassed? First we need to resolve the first question. Why didn't he say so? So that Joseph would not discover unbelief, and the same thing would not happen to him as to Zechariah. It is not difficult to believe a thing when it is already before your eyes; and when there is no beginning of it, then the words cannot be accepted so easily. That's why the angel didn't speak at first; For the same reason, Virgo was silent. She thought that she would not convince the groom by reporting an unusual case, but, on the contrary, would upset him by giving him the idea that she was covering up the crime that had been committed. If She herself, hearing about such grace given to Her, judges humanly: and says: I don’t know what this will be like, where my husband is(34 And Mary said to the angel: How will this be, since I do not know the husband? OK. 1:34), then Joseph would have been much more doubtful, especially hearing this from his suspected wife. That is why the Virgin does not speak to Joseph at all, but the angel appears when circumstances require. Why, they will say, was not the same done with the Virgin, why was it not announced to Her after conception? To protect Her from embarrassment and more confusion. Without knowing the matter clearly, She could naturally decide to do something bad to herself, and, unable to bear the shame, resort to a noose or a sword. Truly, the Virgin was worthy of wonder in everything; and the Evangelist Luke, depicting Her virtue, says that when she heard the greeting, she did not suddenly surrender to joy and believe what was said, but was confused and pondered: what will this kiss be like?(39 And Mary arose in those days, and went with haste into the hill country, to the city of Judah, OK. 1:39)? Being of such strict rules, the Virgin could lose her mind from sadness, imagining shame and seeing no hope for anyone to believe Her words that Her pregnancy was not the result of adultery. So, to prevent this from happening, an angel came to her before conception. It was necessary that the one into whose womb the Creator of all things ascended should not know any confusion; so that the soul that is worthy of being a servant of such mysteries is free from all confusion. That is why the angel announces to the Virgin before conception, and to Joseph during Her pregnancy. Many, out of simplicity and misunderstanding, found disagreement in the fact that Ev. Luke mentions the gospel of Mary, and St. Matthew about the gospel to Joseph, not knowing that it was both. The same thing must be observed throughout the narrative; In this way we will resolve many apparent differences. So the angel comes to the confused Joseph. Until now, there had been no appearance, both for the reason stated above, and so that Joseph’s wisdom would be revealed. And when the matter is nearing completion, the angel finally appears. Having thought this, an angel appeared to Joseph in a dream. Do you notice the meekness of this husband? Not only did he not punish, but he also did not tell anyone, not even the suspect himself, but thought only with himself, and tried to hide the cause of embarrassment from the Virgin herself. The evangelist did not say that Joseph wanted to drive Her out, but to let Her go: he was so meek and modest! Having thought this to him, an angel appears in a dream. Why not in reality, as he appears to the shepherds, Zechariah and the Virgin? Joseph had a lot of faith; he did not need such a phenomenon. For the Virgin, an extraordinary phenomenon was needed before the event, because what was preached was very important, more important than what was preached to Zechariah; and for the shepherds a manifestation was needed, because these were simple people. Joseph receives a revelation upon conception, when his soul was already seized with evil suspicion, and is ready to move on to good hopes, if only someone would appear and show a convenient path to that. For this reason, the gospel is preached after suspicion has arisen, so that this itself will serve as proof of what was said to him. What he didn’t tell anyone about, but only thought in his mind, hearing about from an angel served as an undoubted sign that the angel had come and was speaking from God, because God alone has the ability to know the secrets of the heart. See how many goals are achieved! Joseph's wisdom is revealed; the timing of what was said helps him in faith; the narrative itself becomes certain, since it shows that Joseph was exactly in the position in which he should have been. How does the angel assure him? Listen and marvel at the wisdom of what is said. Having come, the angel said to him: Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to accept Miriam your wife. He immediately brings to his memory David, from whom Christ was supposed to come, and does not allow him to remain in confusion, reminding him of the promise given to the whole family by the name of his ancestors. Otherwise, why would he be called the son of David? Don't be afraid. Other times God does things wrong; and when someone plotted against Abraham’s wife, which should not have happened, God used the strongest expressions and threats, although even there the cause was ignorance. Pharaoh took Sarah to him unknowingly, but God brought him into fear. But here God acts more leniently because a very important matter was being accomplished, and there was a big difference between Pharaoh and Joseph, which is why there was no need for threats. Having said: do not be afraid, shows that Joseph was afraid to offend God by keeping a woman suspected of adultery in the house, because if this had not been the case, he would not have thought of letting her go. So, from everything it is revealed that an angel came from God, discovering and retelling everything that Joseph was thinking about and what was disturbing his mind. Having spoken the name of the Virgin, the angel did not stop there, but added: “Your wife would not have been called by what name if Her virginity had been corrupted.” Here he calls a betrothed woman a wife: this is how Scripture usually calls betrothed people sons-in-law even before marriage. What does it mean: acceptance? To keep her in his house, because Joseph had already mentally let go of the Virgin. This one that has been released, says the angel, keep with you; God entrusts it to you, not your parents. He entrusts her not for marriage, but to live together; hands it over, announcing it through me. Just as Christ later entrusted Her to his disciple, so now She is entrusted to Joseph. Then the angel, hinting at the reason for his appearance, kept silent about Joseph’s evil suspicion; and meanwhile he destroyed it more modestly and decently, explaining the reason for the conception and showing that because Joseph was afraid and wanted to let Her go, he must accept and keep Her with him, and thus completely freed him from anxiety. Not only is she pure from unholy confusion, says the angel, but she has also conceived in her womb supernaturally. Therefore, not only put aside fear, but also rejoice: born in her, from the Spirit is Holy. A strange thing, beyond human understanding and beyond the laws of nature! How can Joseph, who has not heard of such events, be convinced of this? The revelation of the past, says the angel. That’s why he discovered everything that was going on in Joseph’s mind, what he was outraged by, what he was afraid of and what he decided to do, so that through this he could be convinced of that. It’s fairer to say that the angel assures Joseph not only of the past, but also of the future.

21 She will give birth to a Son, and you will call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins.

Although what is born is from the Holy Spirit, do not think of yourself that you are excluded from service during the incarnation. Although you do not contribute to the birth, and the Virgin remained inviolable, however, what belongs to the father, then, without harming the dignity of virginity, I give to you, that is, you will give a name to the one being born - you will call His name. Although He is not your son, you should be His father instead. So, starting with the naming of the name, I assimilate you to the one being born. Then, so that no one from here concludes that Joseph is the father, listen to the caution with which the angel speaks further. She will give birth, he says, to a son. He did not say: he will give birth to you, but he expressed it vaguely: he will give birth, since Mary gave birth not to him, but to the whole universe. This is why the name was brought by an angel from heaven to show that it is miraculously born, because God himself sends the name from above through an angel to Joseph. Truly, it was not just a name, but a treasure of countless blessings. That’s why the angel explains it, inspires good hopes, and thereby leads Joseph to faith. We are usually more inclined to have good hopes, and therefore believe them more willingly. So, having confirmed Joseph in the faith to everyone - both the past, and the future, and the present, and the honor shown to him - the angel by the way quotes the words of the prophet, who confirms all this. But, without yet citing his words, he announces the blessings that will be given to the world through the one born. What are these benefits? Liberation from sins and their destruction. He, says the angel, will save His people from their sins. And here something wonderful is announced; the gospel preaches liberation not from sensual warfare, not from barbarians, but - what is much more important - liberation from sins, from which no one could liberate before. Why, they will ask, did he say: his people, and did not add the pagans? So as not to suddenly surprise the listener. He gave the intelligent listener to understand about the pagans, because His people are not only Jews, but also all who come and receive knowledge from Him. See how He revealed His dignity to us, calling the Jewish people His people. By this the angel shows precisely that the one who is being born is the Son of God, and that he is talking about the heavenly King, since, besides this single Being, no other power can forgive sins. So, having received such a gift, let us take all measures so as not to disgrace such a great benefit. If our sins were worthy of punishment even before such an honor, then they are even more worthy after such an indescribable benefit.

22 And all this happened, that what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet might be fulfilled, saying:

Worthy of a miracle and worthy of himself, the angel exclaimed, saying: “This all happened.” He saw the sea and the abyss of God’s love for mankind; I saw in reality something that could never have been expected to come true; I saw how the laws of nature were violated, reconciliation was accomplished, - The highest of all descends to the one who is the most insignificant, the mediastinum collapses, barriers are abolished; I saw even more than that - and in a few words he expressed the miracle: all this happened, that what was spoken from the Lord might come true. Don’t think, he says, that this has just been determined; this was preformed in ancient times, as Paul tried to show everywhere. Then, (the angel) sends Joseph to Isaiah, so that, having awakened, even if he forgets his words, as if they were completely new, having been nourished by the Scriptures, he would remember the words of the prophets, and along with them he would bring to memory his words. He did not tell this to his wife, because she, as a young woman, was still inexperienced; but offers a prophecy to her husband, as a righteous man who delved into the writings of the prophets. And first he said to Joseph: Miriam is your wife; and now, citing the words of the prophet, she entrusts him with the secret that she is a Virgin. Joseph would not have calmed down his thoughts so quickly, hearing from the angel that she was a Virgin, if he had not first heard it from Isaiah; from the prophet he should have heard this not as something strange, but as something known and something that had occupied him for a long time. That is why the angel, in order for his words to be more conveniently accepted, cites the prophecy of Isaiah; and does not stop there, but raises the prophecy to God, saying that these are not the words of a prophet, but of the God of all. That is why he did not say, “Let what was spoken by Isaiah be fulfilled,” but he said, “Let what was spoken of the Lord be fulfilled.” The mouth was Isaiah, but the prophecy was given from above.

23 Behold, the Virgin will be with child and give birth to a Son, and they will call His name Immanuel, which means: God is with us.

Why, you say, was His name not given? Emmanuel, and - Jesus Christ? Because it is not said: name, but: they will call it, i.e. peoples and the event itself. Here the name is borrowed from an incident, as is typical of Scripture to use incidents instead of names. So, the words: will be called Immanuel mean nothing more than that they will see God with people. Although God has always been with people, he has never been so obvious. If the Jews shamelessly persist, then we will ask them which baby is named: soon to be captured, brazenly plundered ( 3 And I approached the prophetess, and she conceived and gave birth to a son. And the Lord said to me: call his name: Mager-shelal-hash-baz, Is. 8:3)? They can't say anything to this. How did the prophet say: name him, he will soon be captured? Since after His birth it happened that the spoils were taken and divided, the very incident that happened to him is given to him instead of a name. In the same way, the prophet says about the city that it will be called the city of righteousness, mother of the city, faithful Zion ( 26 And I will again appoint for you judges, as before, and counselors, as at the beginning; then they will say about you: “city of righteousness, faithful capital.” Is. 1:26); and yet nowhere is it visible that this city was called truth; it continued to be called Jerusalem. But since Jerusalem really became such when it corrected itself, the prophet said that it would be called that. Thus, if any incident shows more clearly than the name itself who committed it or took advantage of it, then Scripture imputes the reality of the event to him in the name. If the Jews, having been refuted in this, find another objection to what was said about virginity, and present us with other translators, saying: they translated not: virgin, but: young woman (neanij), then we will tell them in advance that seventy interpreters, according to justice, before all others deserve more credit. They translated after the coming of Christ, remaining Jews; and therefore one can rightly suspect that they said this more out of enmity, and with the intention of obscured the prophecy. The seventy who, a hundred years before the coming of Christ, or even more, undertook this work, and, moreover, with such a large company, are free from any such suspicion; They, both in time, and in number, and by mutual agreement, are predominantly worthy of belief. But if the Jews bring evidence from those translators, then victory is on our side. In Scripture, the name of youth (neaniothtoj) is often used instead of virginity, not only about women, but also about men. Young men, it says, virgins, old men with young men ( 12 youths and maidens, elders and youths Ps. 148:12). And again, speaking about the virgin who was subjected to violence, he says: if the damsel cries(neanij), i.e. maiden ( 27 For he met her in the field, and Although the betrothed girl screamed, but there was no one to save her. Deut. 22:27). The same meaning is confirmed by the previous words of the prophet. In fact, the prophet does not simply say: the virgin will receive with child; but having said in advance: behold, the Lord himself will give you a sign (14 Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: behold, a virgin will be with child and give birth to a Son, and they will call His name Immanuel. Is. 7:14), then he added: behold, the virgin will receive with child. If it were not for the virgin to give birth, but for the birth to take place according to the law of marriage, then how could such an incident be a sign? The sign must go out of the ordinary order, be something strange and extraordinary. Otherwise, how will it be a sign?

Dondezhe; but do not suspect that Joseph later knew her. The Evangelist only lets us know that the Virgin was completely inviolable before her birth. Why, they will say, did he use the word: dondezhe? Because this is often done in Scripture. This word does not mean a specific time. So it is said about the ark: the raven will not return, until the earth comes from above (7 And he sent out a raven, [to see if the water had subsided from the earth,] which flew out and flew back and forth until the earth was dried up from the water. Life 8:7, 14), although he did not return afterwards. Scripture also says about God: from everlasting to everlasting you art (2 Lord! You are our refuge forever and ever. Ps. 89:2), but does not set limits to this. And again, when preaching the gospel he says: In his days righteousness and abundance of peace will shine until the moon is taken away (7 In his days the righteous will prosper, and there will be abundance of peace until the moon ceases; Ps. 71:7), however, does not mean the end for this beautiful luminary. So here the evangelist used the word - dondezhe, as evidence of what happened before birth. What happened after birth is left to you to judge for yourself. What you needed to know from him, he said, that is, that the Virgin was inviolable before birth. And what is self-evident from what has been said, as a true consequence, is left to your own reflection, that is, that such a righteous man (like Joseph) did not want to know the Virgin after she so miraculously became matter, and was worthy to give birth in an unheard of way, and produce extraordinary fruit. And if he knew her and really had her as a wife, then why would Jesus Christ entrust her to his disciple as a husbandless woman who has no one, and order him to take her to himself? But they will say: how are James and others called brothers of Jesus Christ? Just like Joseph himself, he was revered as the husband of Mary. The birth of Christ was hidden for the time being by many veils. Therefore John also called them (brothers), saying: nor His brethren's faith in Him (5 For even His brothers did not believe in Him. In. 7:5). However, those who had previously disbelieved became worthy of wonder and glory. Thus, when Paul arrived in Jerusalem to discuss the faith, he immediately appeared to James, who was so respected that he was the first to be appointed bishop. They also say that he led such a strictly ascetic life that all his limbs became dead, that from continuous prayer and incessant prostrations his forehead hardened to such an extent that it was no different in rigidity from the knees of a camel. He also admonishes Paul, who later came to Jerusalem again, saying: You see, brother, how many people have gathered (20 When they heard it, they glorified God and said to him, “You see, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are, and all of them are zealots of the law.” Acts 21:20)? So great was his prudence and zeal, or better yet: so great was the power of Christ! In fact, those who reviled Christ during His earthly life, after His death, were so jealous of Him that they were completely ready to even die for Him - which especially shows the power of the resurrection. For this purpose the most glorious thing was kept to the end, so that the proof would be beyond doubt. If we forget those whom we marvel at during life after death, then how did those who blasphemed Christ during life recognize Him afterward as God, if He was ordinary person? How would they have decided to go to death for Him if they had not had clear proof of the resurrection?

Source

The sacred book of the Christian religion, a record of God's revelations to man received over many millennia. This is a book of divine instructions. It gives us peace in grief, solutions to life's problems, conviction of sin, and the spiritual maturity needed to overcome our worries.

The Bible cannot be called one book. It is a whole collection of books, a library, written under the guidance of God by people who lived in different centuries. The Bible contains history, philosophy, and science. It also includes poetry and drama, biographical information and prophecy. Reading the Bible Gives Us Inspiration It's no surprise that the Bible, in whole or in part, has been translated into more than 1,200 languages. Every year, more copies of the Bible are sold worldwide than any other book.

The Bible truthfully answers questions that have troubled people from time immemorial: “How did man appear?”; "What happens to people after death?"; "Why are we here on earth?"; "Can we know the meaning and meaning of life?" Only the Bible reveals the truth about God, shows the way to eternal life, and explains the eternal problems of sin and suffering.

The Bible is divided into two parts: the Old Testament, which tells about God's participation in the life of the Jewish people before the coming of Jesus Christ, and the New Testament, which gives information about the life and teachings of Christ in all His truth and beauty.

(Greek - “good news”) - the biography of Jesus Christ; books revered as sacred in Christianity that tell of the divine nature of Jesus Christ, his birth, life, miracles, death, resurrection and ascension.

The translation of the Bible into Russian was begun by the Russian Bible Society by the Highest order of the Sovereign Emperor Alexander I in 1816, resumed by the Highest permission of the Sovereign Emperor Alexander II in 1858, completed and published with the blessing of the Holy Synod in 1876. This edition contains the text Synodal translation of 1876, re-verified with the Hebrew text Old Testament and the Greek text of the New Testament.

The commentary on the Old and New Testaments and the appendix "The Holy Land in the Time of Our Lord Jesus Christ" are reprinted from the Bible published by the Brussels publishing house "Life with God" (1989).

Download Bible and Gospel

1 The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God,
2 As it is written in the prophets: Behold, I send My angel before You, who will prepare Your way before You.
3 The voice of one crying in the wilderness: Prepare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.
4 John appeared, baptizing in the wilderness and preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins....

1 Genealogy of Jesus Christ, Son of David, Son of Abraham.
2 Abraham begat Isaac; Isaac gave birth to Jacob; Jacob begat Judah and his brothers;
3 Judah begat Perez and Zehra by Tamar; Perez begat Hezrom; Hezrom begat Aram;
4 Aram begot Abinadab; Amminadab begat Nahshon; Nahshon begat Salmon;...

1. As many have already begun to compose narratives about events that are completely known among us,
2. as those who from the very beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the Word conveyed to us,
3. then I decided, after a thorough examination of everything from the beginning, to describe to you in order, venerable Theophilus,
4. so that you may know the solid foundation of the doctrine in which you have been instructed....

Introduction to the Books of the New Testament

The Scriptures of the New Testament were written in Greek, with the exception of the Gospel of Matthew, which, according to tradition, was 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 different modern languages all over the world are translations from the Greek original. The Greek language in which the New Testament was written was no longer the classical ancient Greek language and was not, as previously thought, a special New Testament language. It is a spoken, everyday language of the 1st century. according to R. X., spread throughout the world and known in science under the name “common dialect,” yet both the style and turns of speech, and the way of thinking of the sacred writers of the New Testament reveal Hebrew or Aramaic influence.

The original text of the New Testament has reached us in a large number of ancient manuscripts, more or less complete, numbering about 5000 (from the 2nd to the 16th centuries). Before recent years the most ancient of them did not go back further than the 4th century. according to R. X. But recently many fragments of ancient manuscripts of the New Testament on papyrus (III and even II centuries) have been discovered. For example, Bodmer's manuscripts: John, Luke, 1 and 2 Pet, Jude - were found and published in the early years of the 20th century. In addition to Greek manuscripts, we have ancient translations or versions in Latin, Syriac, Coptic and other languages ​​(Vetus Itala, Peshitto, Vulgata, etc.), of which the most ancient existed already from the 2nd century to A.D.

Finally, numerous quotes from the Church Fathers have been preserved in Greek and other languages ​​in such quantities that if the text of the New Testament were lost and all the ancient manuscripts were destroyed, then experts could restore this text from quotes from the works of the Holy Fathers. All this abundant material makes it possible to check and clarify the text of the New Testament and classify its various forms (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 New Testament is in an exceptionally favorable position. Both in terms of the number of manuscripts and the short period of time. separating the oldest of them from the original, and in the number of translations, and in their antiquity, and in the seriousness and volume of critical work carried out on the text, it surpasses all other texts (for details, see: “Hidden Treasures and New Life,” archaeological discoveries and the Gospel , Bruges, 1959, pp. 34 ff.).

The text of the New Testament as a whole is recorded completely irrefutably.

The New Testament consists of 27 books. The publishers have divided them into 260 chapters of unequal length for ease of reference and citation. This division is not present in the original text. The modern division into chapters in the New Testament, as in the whole Bible, has often been attributed to the Dominican Cardinal Hugo (1263), who worked it out while composing a symphony to the Latin Vulgate, but it is now thought with greater reason that the division goes back to the Archbishop of Canterbury, Stephen 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 legal (Four Gospels), historical (Acts of the Apostles), teaching (seven conciliar epistles and fourteen epistles of the Apostle Paul) and prophetic: Apocalypse, or Revelation of St. John the Theologian (see Long Catechism of Metropolitan Philateer)

However, modern experts consider this distribution to be outdated: in fact, all the books of the New Testament are both legal and historical teaching, and prophecy is not only in the Apocalypse. New Testament scholarship pays great attention to the precise establishment of the chronology of the Gospels and other New Testament events. Scientific chronology allows the reader to trace with sufficient accuracy through the New Testament the life and ministry of our Lord Jesus Christ, the apostles and the primitive Church (see Appendices).

The books of the New Testament can be distributed as follows.

• Three so-called synoptic Gospels: Matthew, Mark, Luke and separately, the fourth is the Gospel of John. New Testament scholarship devotes much attention to the study of the relationships of the first three Gospels and their relation to the Gospel of John (synoptic problem).
• The Book of the Acts of the Apostles and the Epistles of the Apostle Paul ("Corpus Paulinum"), which are usually divided into:
  - Early Epistles: 1 and 2 Thessalonians;
  - Greater Epistles: Galatians, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Romans;
  - Messages from bonds, that is, written from Rome, where St. Paul was in prison: to the Philippians, to the Colossians, to the Ephesians, to Philimoi;
  - Pastoral Epistles: 1 to Timothy, to Titus, 2 to Timothy;
  - Epistle to the Hebrews;
• Council Epistles ("Corpus Catholicum")
• Revelation of John the Theologian. (Sometimes in the New Testament they distinguish “Corpus Joannicum”, i.e. everything that Apostle John wrote for the comparative study of his Gospel in connection with his epistles and Rev.)

Four Gospels

1. The word "gospel" in Greek means "good news." This is what our Lord Jesus Christ Himself called his teaching (Matthew 24:14; 26:13; Mark 1:15; 13:10; 19:; 16:15). Therefore, for us, the “gospel” is inextricably linked with Him: it is the “good news” of the salvation given to the world through the incarnate Son of God. Christ and His apostles preached the gospel without writing it down. By the mid-1st century, this preaching was established by the Church in a strong oral tradition. The Eastern custom of memorizing sayings, stories, and even large texts helped Christians of the apostolic era accurately preserve the unrecorded First Gospel. After the 50s, when eyewitnesses of Christ's earthly ministry began to pass away one after another, the need arose to write down the gospel (Luke 1:1). Thus, the “gospel” came to mean the narrative of the Savior’s teaching recorded by the apostles. 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 (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John) are recognized by the Church as inspired, that is, written under the direct influence of the Holy Spirit. They are called “from Matthew”, “from Mark”, etc. (the Greek kata corresponds to the Russian “according to Matthew”, “according to Mark”, etc.), for the life and teachings of Christ are set out in these books by these four sacred writers. Their gospels were not compiled into one book, which made it possible to see the gospel story from different points of view. In the II century. St. Irenaeus of Lyons calls the evangelists by name and points to their gospels as the only canonical ones (Against heresies, 2, 28, 2). Contemporary of St. Irenaeus Tatian made the first attempt to create a single gospel narrative, composed of various texts from the four gospels, the Diatessaron, i.e., the “gospel of the four.”
3. The apostles did not set out to create 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, to 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 always have an individual coloring. The Holy Spirit does not certify the accuracy of the details of the facts described in the gospel, but spiritual meaning contained in them.
   The minor contradictions found in the presentation of the evangelists are explained by the fact that God gave the sacred writers complete freedom in conveying certain specific facts in relation to different categories of listeners, which further emphasizes the unity of meaning and orientation of all four gospels.

Books of the New Testament

• Gospel of Matthew
• Gospel of Mark
• Gospel of Luke
• Gospel of John

Acts of the Holy Apostles

Council Epistles

• Epistle of James
• First Epistle of Peter
• Second Epistle of Peter
• First Epistle of John
• Second Epistle of John
• Third Epistle of John
• Epistle of Jude

Epistles of the Apostle Paul

• Epistle to the Romans
• First Epistle to the Corinthians
• Second Epistle to the Corinthians
• Epistle to the Galatians
• Epistle to the Ephesians
• Epistle to the Philippians
• Epistle to the Colossians
• First Epistle to the Thessalonians
• Second Epistle to the Thessalonians
• First Epistle to Timothy
• Second Epistle to Timothy
• Epistle to Titus
• Epistle to Philemon
• Hebrews

Bible. Gospel. New Testament. Download the Bible. Download the Gospel of: Luke, Mark, Matthew, John. Revelation of John the Theologian (Apocalypse). Act of the Apostles. Letter of the Apostles. Download in format: fb2, doc, docx, pdf, lit, isilo.pdb, rb

How to Study the Bible

1. Read the Bible daily, in a quiet and peaceful place where no one will disturb you. Daily reading, even if you do not read that much each day, is more beneficial than any occasional reading. You can start with 15 minutes a day and then gradually increase the time allotted for Bible reading
2. Set a goal for yourself to know God better and to achieve a deep love for God in your communication with Him. God speaks to us through His Word, and we speak to Him in prayers.
3. Start reading the Bible with prayer. Ask God to reveal Himself and His will to you. Confess to Him the sins that may hinder your approach to God.
4. Take short notes as you read the Bible Write your notes in a notebook or keep a spiritual journal to record your thoughts and inner experiences
5. Read slowly one chapter, or maybe two or three chapters. You can read just one paragraph, but be sure to reread at least once everything you read before in one sitting.
6. As a rule, it is very useful to provide written answers to the following questions when understanding the true meaning of a particular chapter or paragraph: a What is main idea read text? What is its meaning?
7. Which verse of the text expresses the main idea? (Such “key verses” should be memorized by reading them aloud several times. Knowing the verses by heart will allow you to reflect on important spiritual truths throughout the day, when, for example, you are standing in line or riding on public transport, etc. Is there in the text you read a command that I must obey? Is there a promise that I can claim to fulfill? d How will I benefit from accepting the truth expressed in the text? e. How should I use this truth in my own life, in accordance with the will of God? ( Avoid general and vague statements Try to be clear and specific as possible In your notebook, write how and when you will use the teaching of a particular paragraph or chapter in your life)
8. End your classes with prayer Ask God to give you inner spiritual strength to draw closer to Him on this day Continue to talk to God throughout the day His presence will help you be strong in any situation

Comments on Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION TO THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

SYNOPTIC GOSPELS

The Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke are usually called 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 in 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 arranged in the same way. Therefore, they can be written in parallel columns and compared with each other.

After this, it becomes very obvious that they are very close to each other. If, for example, we compare the story of the feeding of the five thousand (Matthew 14:12-21; Mark 6:30-44; Luke 5:17-26), then this is the same story, told in almost the same words.

Or take, for example, another story about the healing of a paralytic (Matthew 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, “said to the paralytic,” appear in all three stories in the same form in the same place. The correspondence between all three Gospels is so close that one must either conclude that all three took material from the same source, or two were based on a third.

THE FIRST GOSPEL

Examining 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 are found in the Gospel of Matthew and 81 in the Gospel of Luke. Only four of the 105 passages in the Gospel of Mark are not found in either the Gospel of Matthew or the Gospel of Luke. There are 661 verses in the Gospel of Mark, 1068 verses in the Gospel of Matthew, and 1149 in the Gospel of Luke. There are no less than 606 verses from Mark in the Gospel of Matthew, and 320 in the Gospel of Luke. Of the 55 verses in 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 Matthew or Luke have differences from the Gospel of Mark, but it is never the case that they both were different from him. One of them always follows the order that Mark follows.

REVISION OF THE GOSPEL OF MARK

Due to the fact that the Gospels of Matthew and Luke are much larger in volume more gospel from Mark, you might think that the Gospel of Mark is a brief transcription of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke. But one fact indicates that the Gospel of Mark is the earliest of them all: so to speak, the authors of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke improve 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, those who suffered various diseases; expelled many demons."

Mat. 8.16:"He cast out the spirits with a word and healed everyone sick."

Onion. 4.40:"He, laying on everyone of them hands, healed

Or let's take another example:

Map. 3:10: “For He healed many.”

Mat. 12:15: “He healed them all.”

Onion. 6:19: "... power came from Him and healed everyone."

Approximately the same change is noted in the description of Jesus' visit to Nazareth. Let's compare this description in the Gospels of Matthew and Mark:

Map. 6.5.6: “And he could not perform any miracle there... and he marveled at their unbelief.”

Mat. 13:58: “And he did not perform 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 authors of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke leave out little hints from the Gospel of Mark that may somehow detract from the greatness of Jesus. The Gospels of Matthew and Luke omit three remarks found in the Gospel of Mark:

Map. 3.5:“And he looked upon them with anger, grieving because of the hardness of their hearts...”

Map. 3.21:“And when his neighbors heard, 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 earlier than the others. It gives a simple, lively and direct account, and the authors of Matthew and Luke were already beginning to be influenced by dogmatic and theological considerations, and therefore they chose their words more carefully.

TEACHINGS OF JESUS

We have already seen that the Gospel of Matthew has 1068 verses and the Gospel of Luke 1149 verses, and that 582 of these 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 among 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's where we see the difference: the material that the authors 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 shared by the Gospels of Matthew and Luke deal with something other than that. that Jesus did, but what 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. This book must have been extremely important in those days because it was the first textbook 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 was a witness to 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 the author of the Gospel of Matthew does. 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 the Hebrew language.”

Thus, we can consider that it was Matthew who wrote the book from which all people should draw as a source who want to know what Jesus taught. It was 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 to him the Sermon on the Mount and almost everything we know about the teaching of Jesus. In other words, it is to the author of the Gospel of Mark that we owe our knowledge of life events Jesus, and Matthew - knowledge of the essence teachings Jesus.

MATTHEW THE TANKER

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 should have hated him terribly, because the Jews hated their fellow tribesmen who served the victors. Matthew must have been a traitor in their eyes.

But Matthew had one gift. Most of Jesus' disciples were fishermen and did not have the talent to put words on paper, but Matthew was supposed to be an expert in this matter. When Jesus called Matthew, who was sitting at the toll booth, he stood up and, leaving everything but his pen, followed Him. Matthew nobly used his literary talent 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, so that when reading it we will pay attention to this.

First, and above all, the Gospel of Matthew - this is the gospel written for the Jews. It was written by a Jew to convert the Jews.

One of the main purposes of Matthew's Gospel was to show that in Jesus all the Old Testament prophecies were fulfilled and therefore He must be the Messiah. One phrase, a recurring theme, runs throughout the book: “It came to pass that God spoke by the prophet.” This phrase is repeated in the Gospel of Matthew no less than 16 times. The Birth of Jesus and His Name - Fulfillment of Prophecy (1, 21-23); as well as flight to Egypt (2,14.15); massacre of the innocents (2,16-18); Joseph's settlement in Nazareth and the raising 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 Jesus' clothes as He hung on the Cross (27,35). The author of the Gospel of Matthew made it his main goal to show that the Old Testament prophecies were fulfilled in Jesus, that every detail of Jesus' life was foretold by the prophets, and thereby 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 appeal is closest and dearest to his heart. To the Canaanite woman who turned to Him for help, Jesus first answered: “I was sent only dead sheep house of Israel" (15,24). Sending the twelve apostles to proclaim the good news, Jesus told them: “Do not go into the way of the Gentiles and do not enter the city of Samaritans, but go especially to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” (10, 5.6). But don’t think that this is the Gospel for everyone possible ways excludes pagans. Many will come from the east and 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 order was given to the Church to set out on a campaign: “Go therefore and teach all nations.” (28,19). It is, of course, obvious that the author of Matthew's Gospel is primarily interested in the Jews, but he foresees the day when all nations will be gathered together.

The Jewish origin and Jewish orientation of the Gospel of Matthew is also evident in its attitude towards the law. Jesus did not come to destroy the law, but to fulfill it. Not even the smallest part of the law will pass. There is no need to teach people to break the law. The righteousness of a Christian must exceed 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 saw that it had a place in Christian teaching. In addition, we should note the obvious paradox in the attitude of the author of the Gospel of Matthew to the scribes and Pharisees. He recognizes their special powers: “The scribes and Pharisees sat in 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 as 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 "born of vipers" (3, 7-12). They complain that Jesus eats and drinks with publicans and sinners (9,11); they declared that Jesus casts out demons not by the power of God, but by the power of the prince of demons (12,24). They are plotting to destroy Him (12,14); Jesus warns the disciples to beware not 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 cannot discern the signs of the times (16,3); they are killers of prophets (21,41). There is no other chapter in the entire New Testament like Mat. 23, in which it is not what the scribes and Pharisees teach that is condemned, but their behavior and way of life. The author condemns them for the fact that they do not at all correspond to the teaching they preach, and do not at all achieve the ideal established by them and for them.

The author of Matthew's Gospel is also very interested in the Church. From all the Synoptic Gospels the word Church found only in the Gospel of Matthew. Only the Gospel of Matthew includes a passage about the Church after Peter's confession at Caesarea Philippi (Matthew 16:13-23; cf. Mark 8:27-33; Luke 9:18-22). Only Matthew says that disputes should be resolved by the Church (18,17). By the time the Gospel of Matthew was written, the Church had become a large organization and indeed the most important factor in the life of Christians.

The Gospel of Matthew especially reflects an interest in the apocalyptic; in other words, to what Jesus spoke about His Second Coming, the end of the world and the Day of Judgment. IN Mat. 24 provides a much more complete account of Jesus' apocalyptic reasoning than any other Gospel. Only in the Gospel of Matthew is there a parable of the talents. (25,14-30); about 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 an eminently meaningful gospel.

We have already seen that it was the Apostle Matthew who gathered the first meeting and compiled an anthology of Jesus’ teaching. Matthew was a great systematizer. He collected in one place everything he knew about the teaching of Jesus on this or that issue, and therefore we find in the Gospel of Matthew five large complexes in which the teaching of Christ is collected and systematized. All these five complexes are associated with the Kingdom of God. Here they are:

a) Sermon on the Mount or Law of the Kingdom (5-7)

b) Duty of Kingdom Leaders (10)

c) Parables about the Kingdom (13)

d) Greatness and Forgiveness in the Kingdom (18)

e) The Coming of the King (24,25)

But Matthew not only collected and systematized. We must remember that he wrote in an era before printing, when books were few and far between because they had to be copied by hand. At such a time, comparatively few people had books, and so 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 threes and sevens: three messages of Joseph, three denials of Peter, three questions of Pontius Pilate, seven parables about the Kingdom in chapter 13, sevenfold "woe to you" to the Pharisees and scribes in Chapter 23.

A good example of this is the genealogy of Jesus, with which the Gospel opens. The purpose of a genealogy is to prove that Jesus is the son of David. There are no numbers in Hebrew, they are symbolized by letters; In addition, Hebrew does not have signs (letters) for vowel sounds. David in Hebrew it will be accordingly DVD; if these are taken as numbers rather than letters, their sum would be 14, and the genealogy of Jesus consists of three groups of names, each containing fourteen names. Matthew does his best to arrange Jesus' teachings in a way that people can understand and remember.

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 one more feature: the dominant thought in it is the thought of Jesus the King. The author writes this Gospel to show the kingship and royal origin of Jesus.

The genealogy must prove from the very beginning that Jesus is the son of King David (1,1-17). This title Son of David is used more often in the Gospel of Matthew than in any other Gospel. (15,22; 21,9.15). The Magi came to see the King of the Jews (2,2); Jesus' triumphal entry into Jerusalem is a deliberately dramatized declaration by Jesus of His rights as King (21,1-11). Before Pontius Pilate, Jesus consciously accepts 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 the royal words: “But I say to 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.

FROM MATTHEW THE HOLY GOSPEL (Matthew 1:1-17)

It may seem to the modern reader that Matthew chose a very strange beginning for his Gospel, placing 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, this was the most correct way to begin the story of a person’s life.

The Jews were extremely interested in genealogies. Matthew calls it genealogy book - byblos geneseus- Jesus Christ. In the Old Testament we often find genealogies 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 that he said he found in the archives.

The interest in genealogies was explained by the fact that the Jews attached great importance to the purity of their origin. A person whose blood contained the slightest admixture of foreign 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 list of his genealogy from Aaron himself, without any omissions, and if he got married, then his wife had to present her genealogy back at least five generations back. When Ezra made a change in worship after the return of Israel from exile and re-established the priesthood, the sons of Habaiah, the sons of Hakkoz and the sons of Barzillai were excluded from the priesthood and were called unclean because “they sought their record of genealogy and it was not found.” (Ezra 2:62).

Genealogical archives were kept in the Sanhedrin. Pure-blooded 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 as to make it easier to remember. We must always remember 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 intended to be proof that Jesus was the Son of David and was designed to be easy to carry in the mind.

THREE STAGES (Matthew 1:1-17 (continued))

The very location of the genealogy is very symbolic for all human life. The genealogy is divided into three parts, each corresponding to one of the great stages in the history of Israel.

The first part covers the history before King David. David united Israel into a people and made Israel a strong power to be reckoned with in the world. The first part covers the history of Israel until the rise of its greatest king.

The second part covers the period before the Babylonian captivity. This part talks about the shame of the people, about their tragedy and misfortune.

The third part covers 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, according to our likeness" (Gen. 1:26). Man was created in the image of God. Man was destined to be in friendship with God. He was created to be akin to God. As the great Roman thinker Cicero saw it: “The difference between man and God comes down only to time.” 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 of 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 become.” Man has used his given free will to openly defy and disobey God rather than enter into friendship and fellowship with Him. Left to his own devices, man frustrated God's plan in His creation.

3. Man can regain his greatness. Even after this, God did not leave man to the mercy of fate and his vices. God did not allow man to destroy himself with his recklessness, did not allow it all to end in tragedy. God sent His Son, Jesus Christ, into this world so that He could save man from the quagmire of sin in which he was mired, and free him from the chains of sin with which he had bound himself, so that through Him man could find the friendship he had lost with God.

In the genealogy of Jesus Christ, Matthew shows us the royal greatness found, the tragedy of freedom lost, and the glory of freedom regained. And this, by the grace of God, is the story of humanity and of every person.

REALIZING THE HUMAN DREAM (Matt. 1.1-17 (continued))

This passage highlights two things about Jesus.

1. It is emphasized here that Jesus is the Son of David; The genealogy was compiled mainly to prove this.

Peter emphasizes this in the first recorded sermon of the Christian Church (Acts 2:29-36). Paul speaks of Jesus Christ being born of the seed of David according to the flesh (Rom. 1:3). The author of the Pastoral Epistles urges people to remember Jesus Christ of the seed of David, who rose from the dead (2 Tim. 2.8). The author of the revelation hears the Risen Christ say: “I am the root and descendant of David.” (Rev. 22:16).

This is how Jesus is addressed repeatedly in the gospel story. After the healing of the demon-possessed blind and dumb, the people said: “Is this the Christ, the Son of David?” (Matthew 12:23). A woman from Tire and Sidon, who sought Jesus’ help for her daughter, turns to Him: “Son of David!” (Matthew 15:22). The blind men shouted: “Have mercy on us, O Lord, Son of David!” (Matthew 20,30,31). And how the crowd greets the Son of David as he enters Jerusalem for the last time (Matthew 21.9.15).

It is very significant that Jesus was so welcomed by the crowd. The Jews were expecting something unusual; they never forgot and could never forget that they were God's chosen people. Although their entire history was a long chain of defeats and misfortunes, although they were a forced conquered people, they never forgot the plans of their destiny. And the common people dreamed that a descendant of King David would come to this world and lead them to glory, which they believed was rightfully theirs.

In other words, Jesus was the answer to the people's dream. People, however, see only answers to their dreams of power, wealth, material abundance and the fulfillment of their cherished ambitions. But if man's dreams of peace and beauty, greatness and satisfaction are ever destined to come true, then they can only find fulfillment in Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ and the life He offers people is the answer to people's dreams. There is a passage in the story of Joseph that goes far beyond the scope of the story itself. Along with Joseph in prison were also the chief court cupbearer and the chief court baker. They saw dreams that disturbed them, and they cried out in horror: “We have seen dreams, but there is no one to interpret them” (Gen. 40:8). Just because a person is a person, he is always haunted by a dream, and its fulfillment lies in Jesus Christ.

2. This passage emphasizes that Jesus is the fulfillment of all prophecies: in Him the message of the prophets was fulfilled. Today we do not pay much attention to prophecy and, for the most part, do not want to look for sayings in the Old Testament that were fulfilled in the New Testament. But there is a great and eternal truth in the prophecy: this universe has a purpose and God's purpose for it, and God wants to carry out His specific purposes in it.

One play deals with a time of terrible famine in Ireland in the nineteenth century. Having found nothing better and knowing no other solution, the government sent people to dig roads that were not needed in a completely unknown direction. One of the heroes of the play, Michael, having learned about this, left his job and, returning home, told 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 leading to nowhere. We may view prophecy differently than our ancestors, but behind prophecy is the enduring fact that life and peace are not a road to nowhere, but a path to God's goal.

NOT THE RIGHTEOUS, BUT SINNERS (Matthew 1:1-17 (continued))

The most striking thing about the genealogy is the names of the women. In general, female names are extremely rare in Jewish genealogies. The woman had no legal rights; they looked at her not as a person, but as a thing; she was only the property of her father or husband and they could do with her as they pleased. In everyday morning prayer the Jew thanked God for not making him a pagan, a slave or a woman. In general, the very existence of these names in the genealogy is an extremely amazing and unusual phenomenon.

But if you look at these women - who they were and what they did - you have to be even more surprised. Rahab, or Rahab as she is called in the Old Testament, was the harlot of Jericho (Joshua 2:1-7). Ruth was not even a Jew, but a Moabite (Ruth. 1:4), and does not the law say: “An Ammonite and a 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 hateful people. Tamar was a skilled seductress (Gen. 38). Bathsheba, Solomon's mother, was most cruelly taken by David from Uriah, her husband. (2 Kings 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 also something very remarkable about 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 the barriers are falling.

1. The barrier between Jew and Gentile has disappeared. Rahab, a woman from Jericho, and Ruth, a Moabite woman, found a place in the genealogy of Jesus Christ. This already reflects the truth that in Christ there is neither Jew nor Greek. The universalism of the Gospel and the love of God is already visible here.

2. Barriers between women and men have disappeared. There were no female names in the normal genealogy, but there were female names in the genealogy of Jesus. The old contempt has passed; 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 one who has sinned a lot. “I have not come,” says Jesus, “to call the righteous, but sinners.” (Matthew 9:13).

Already here at the very beginning of the Gospel there are indications of the all-encompassing love of God. God may find His servants among those from whom respected orthodox Jews would shudder.

ENTRY OF THE SAVIOR INTO THE WORLD (Matthew 1:18-25)

Such relationships can confuse us. Firstly, it talks about engagement Mary, then about what Joseph wanted secretly let go her, and then she's named wife his. But this relationship reflects the usual Jewish marriage relationship and procedure, which consisted of several stages.

1. Firstly, matchmaking. It was often committed 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. Secondly, engagement. Engagement can be called a confirmation of the matchmaking concluded between the couple earlier. At this moment, the matchmaking could be interrupted at the request of the girl. If the engagement took place, 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 you 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 betrothed, 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 Jewish marriage customs, it becomes clear that this passage describes the most typical and normal relationship.

Thus, before the marriage, Joseph was told that the Virgin Mary would give birth to a Child by the Holy Spirit, who was to be named Jesus. Jesus - this 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 a King. He came into this world not for His own sake, but for the sake of people and for the sake of our salvation.

BORN OF THE HOLY SPIRIT (Matthew 1:18-25 (continued))

This passage tells us that Jesus will be born of the Holy Spirit in the virgin birth. 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 most important 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 that the birth of Jesus is the result of the work of the Holy Spirit. “It turned out that She (Virgin Mary) was pregnant with the Holy Spirit.” "That which is born in her is of the Holy Spirit." What then does it mean to say that the Holy Spirit took a special part in the birth of Jesus?

According to the Jewish worldview, the Holy Spirit had certain functions. We cannot put all of this into this passage. Christian ideas of the Holy Spirit, since Joseph could not yet know anything about it, and therefore we must interpret it in the light Jewish the idea of ​​the Holy Spirit, for Joseph would have put that idea into the passage because it was the only one he knew.

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 God's people what they should do; Throughout all centuries and generations, the Holy Spirit has brought God's truth to people. And therefore Jesus is the One who brings God's truth to people.

Let's put it another way. 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 like. Until Jesus came, people had only vague and unclear, and often completely wrong, ideas about God. They could best case scenario guess and go by touch; and Jesus could say: “Whoever has seen Me has seen the Father.” (John 14:9). In Jesus, as nowhere else in the world, we see love, compassion, mercy, a seeking heart and the purity of God. With the coming of Jesus, the time of guessing ended and the time of certainty came. Before Jesus came, people did not know at all what virtue was. 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 brought God’s truth to people, but also gives them the ability to recognize 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 that 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 spent half her life visiting the sights and art galleries of the world. Eventually, she was tired; Nothing could surprise or interest her anymore. But one day she meets a man who has few material goods of this world, but who truly knows and loves beauty. They start traveling together and everything changes for this woman. “I never knew what things looked 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 to see the world and things correctly.

CREATION AND RE-CREATION (Matthew 1:18-25 (continued))

3. In a special way the Jews connected the Holy Spirit with creation. God created the world by His Spirit. At the very beginning, the Spirit of God hovered over the waters and out of chaos the world became (Gen. 1,2).“By the word of the Lord were the heavens made,” said the psalmist, “and by the breath of his mouth were all their hosts.” (Ps. 33:6).(As in Hebrew ruach, same in Greek pneuma, mean at the same time spirit And breath)."If you send your spirit, they will be created" (Ps. 103:30).“The Spirit of God created me,” says Job, “and the breath of the Almighty gave me life.” (Job 33:4).

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 primordial chaos has now come to us to bring order to our disordered lives. The power that breathed life into that which had no life came to breathe life into our weakness and our vanity. It can be said this way: 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 recreation. Ezekiel has a grim picture of a field full of bones. He tells how these bones came to life, and then he hears the voice of God saying: “And I will put My Spirit in you, and you will live.” (Ezek. 37:1-14). The rabbis had this saying: “God said to Israel: ‘In this world My Spirit has given you wisdom, but in the hereafter My Spirit will give you life again.’ The Spirit of God can awaken to life people who are lost in sin and deafness.

Thus, through Jesus Christ, the power to recreate life came into this world. Jesus can revive again a soul lost in sin; He can revive dead ideals; He can once again give strength to the fallen to strive for virtue. It can renew life when people have lost everything that life means.

So this chapter not only says that Jesus Christ was born of a virgin. The essence of Matthew's account is that the Spirit of God was more involved in the birth of Jesus than ever before in the world. The Spirit brings the truth of God to the people; The Spirit enables men to know the truth when they see it; The 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 the creative power that came to people; Jesus is a creative force capable of freeing human souls from sinful death.

Commentary (introduction) to the entire book of Matthew

Comments on Chapter 1

In the grandeur of the concept and the force with which the mass of material is subordinated to great ideas, no Scripture of the New or Old Testaments dealing with historical subjects can be compared with the Gospel of Matthew.

Theodore Zahn

Introduction

I. SPECIAL POSITION 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. Due to its emotionality, strong Jewish flavor, many quotations from the Jewish Scriptures and position at the head of all books of the New Testament. Matthew represents 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 regular member of the apostolic group, it would seem strange if the first Gospel was 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, the church historian, quotes Papias, who stated that "Matthew wrote "Logic" in the Hebrew language, and each one interprets it as he can." Irenaeus, Pantaine and Origen generally agree on this. It is widely believed that "Hebrew" is a dialect of Aramaic used by the Jews in the time of our Lord, as this word occurs in the NT. But what is "logic"? Usually this Greek word means "revelations", because in the OT there are revelations God's. In Papias's statement it cannot have 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 Jews to Christ and instruct Jewish Christians, and only later did the Greek version appear; (2) it only applies to statements Jesus, which were later transferred to his Gospel; (3) it refers to "testimony", i.e. quotes from Old Testament Scriptures to show that Jesus is the Messiah. The first and second opinions are more likely.

Matthew's Greek does not read as an explicit translation; but such a widespread tradition (in the absence of early disagreements) 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 did Greek final version for universal use. Joseph, a contemporary of Matthew, did the same. This Jewish historian made the first draft of his "Jewish War" in Aramaic , and then finalized the book in Greek.

Internal evidence The first Gospels are very suitable for a pious 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 in power. (The Romans used Greek, not Latin, in the East.) Details regarding numbers, parables in which we're talking about about money, financial terms, as well as an expressive, correct style - all this was perfectly combined with his profession as a tax collector. The highly educated, non-conservative scholar accepts Matthew as the author of this Gospel in part and under the influence of his compelling internal evidence.

Despite such universal external and corresponding internal evidence, most scientists reject The traditional opinion is that this book was written by the publican Matthew. 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 Gospels are also in the other Gospels.) In answer to this question, first of all we will say: not proven that Ev. 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 “Markian Majority” (and many conservatives do), Matthew might concede that much of Mark’s work was influenced by the energetic Simon Peter, Matthew’s co-apostle, 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 to be 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 characteristics of the publican’s character explain this very well. To give more space to our Lord's speeches, Levi had to give less space to unnecessary details. The same would have happened with Mark if he had written first, and Matthew had seen the traits inherent directly in Peter.

III. WRITING TIME

If the widespread belief that Matthew first wrote the Aramaic version of the Gospel (or at least the sayings of Jesus) is correct, then the date of writing is 45 AD. e., fifteen years after the ascension, completely coincides with ancient legends. He probably completed his more complete, canonical Gospel in Greek in 50-55, and perhaps later.

The view that the Gospel there must be written after the destruction of Jerusalem (70 AD), is based, rather, on disbelief in the ability of Christ to predict future events in detail and other rationalistic theories that ignore or reject inspiration.

IV. PURPOSE OF WRITING AND TOPIC

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 his many rewards was that he was 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 one 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 contender for the throne of David.

The book does not purport to be a complete account of the life of Christ. It begins with His genealogy and childhood, then moves on to the beginning of His public ministry, when He was about thirty years of age. Under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, Matthew selects those aspects of the Savior's life and ministry that testify to Him as Anointed God (which is what the word “Messiah” or “Christ” means). The book takes us to the culmination of events: the suffering, death, resurrection and ascension of the Lord Jesus.

And in this culmination, of course, lies the basis for human salvation.

That 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, thanks to which this salvation was made possible.

Bible Commentaries for Christians does not aim to be exhaustive or technical, but rather to inspire personal reflection and study of the Word. And most of all, they are aimed at creating in the reader’s heart a strong desire for the return of the King.

"And even I, with my heart burning more and more,
And even I, nourishing sweet hope,
I sigh heavily, my Christ,
About the hour when you return,
Losing courage at the sight
Burning steps of Your coming."

F. W. G. Mayer ("St. Paul")

Plan

GENEALOGY AND BIRTH OF THE MESSIAH-KING (CHAPTER 1)

THE EARLY YEARS OF THE MESSIAH KING (CHAPTER 2)

PREPARATION FOR THE MESSIANIC MINISTRY AND ITS BEGINNING (CHAP. 3-4)

ORDER OF THE KINGDOM (CHAP. 5-7)

MIRACLES OF GRACE AND POWERS CREATED BY THE MESSIAH AND DIFFERENT REACTIONS TO THEM (8.1 - 9.34)

GROWING OPPOSITION AND REJECTION OF THE MESSIAH (CHAP. 11-12)

THE KING REJECTED BY ISRAEL DECLARES A NEW, INTERMEDIATE FORM OF THE KINGDOM (CHAPTER 13)

THE MESSIAH'S TIRESLESS GRACE MEETS INCREASING HOSTILITY (14:1 - 16:12)

THE KING PREPARES HIS DISCIPLES (16.13 - 17.27)

THE KING GIVES INSTRUCTION TO HIS DISCIPLES (CHAP. 18-20)

INTRODUCTION AND REJECTION OF THE KING (CHAP. 21-23)

THE KING'S SPEECH ON THE MOUNT OF OLIVES (CHAP. 24-25)

SUFFERING AND DEATH OF THE KING (CHAP. 26-27)

TRIUMPH OF THE KING (CHAPTER 28)

I. GENEALOGY AND BIRTH OF THE MESSIAH-KING (Ch. 1)

A. Genealogy of Jesus Christ (1:1-17)

From a casual reading of the NT, the reader may wonder why this book begins with such a boring topic as the family tree. Someone may decide that there is nothing terrible if they ignore this list of names and move past it to the place where the events began.

However, a pedigree is extremely necessary. 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 story exactly where he should have started: with documentary evidence that Jesus inherited the rightful right to the throne of David through His stepfather Joseph.

This genealogy shows Jesus' legal descent as King of Israel; in the genealogy of Ev. Luke shows His hereditary descent as the Son of David. Matthew's genealogy follows the royal line from David through his

son of Solomon, the next king; Luke's genealogy is based on consanguinity through another son, Nathan. This genealogy includes Joseph, who adopted Jesus; the genealogy in Luke 3 traces probably the ancestors of Mary, of whom Jesus was the natural son.

A thousand years earlier, God made an alliance with David, promising him a kingdom that would never end and an unbroken line of rulers (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 necessary conditions necessary to claim the throne of Israel (legal and hereditary). And since He is alive now, there can be no other contenders.

1,1 -15 Formulation "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" ("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 by the word "Lord". The same can be said of 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 Jehoiachin to Joseph. The first segment leads to David, the second covers the period of the kingdom, the third period includes a list of people of royal descent during their stay in exile (586 BC onwards).

There are many interesting details in this list. For example, four women are mentioned here: Tamar, Rahab, Ruth And Bathsheba (who was behind Urieah). 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 pagans (Rahab and Ruth).

The fact that they are included in the introductory part of Ev. 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 barriers of race and sex will be broken down.

It is also interesting to mention the king by name Jeconiah. In Jeremiah 22:30, God pronounced a curse on this man: “Thus says the Lord: Write down this man childless, an unfortunate man in his days, for no one from his seed will sit on the throne of David or rule in Judah.”

If Jesus had truly been 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 resolved 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 the word is singular and feminine, indicating that Jesus was born from Maria, not from Joseph. But, in addition to these interesting details of the genealogy, it is also worth mentioning the controversy contained in it.

1,17 Matthew draws special attention to the presence of three groups according to fourteen births in each. However, we know from the OT that there are some names missing from his list. For example, between Jehoram and Uzziah (v. 8) Ahaziah, Joash and Amaziah reigned (see 2 Kings 8 - 14; 2 Chron. 21 - 25). Both Matthew and Luke mention two identical names: Shealtiel 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 individuals, and then diverge again. It becomes even more difficult to understand when we notice that both Gospels refer to Ezra 3:2, classifying Zerubbabel as the sons of Shealtiel, while in 1 Chronicles 3:19 he is recorded as the son of Pedaiah.

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, such a difference in the number of generations still seems strange.

What position should the student of the Bible take in regard to these difficulties and apparent contradictions? First, our fundamental premise is that the Bible is the inspired Word of God and therefore cannot contain errors. 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 likely to be a lack of knowledge than a biblical error. Difficult passages should motivate us to study the Bible and seek answers. “It is the glory of God to conceal a matter, but the glory of kings is to search out a matter” (Proverbs 25:2).

Careful research by historians and archaeological excavations have failed 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 born of Mary (1:18-25)

1,18 Birth of Jesus Christ was different from the birth of other people mentioned in the genealogy. There we found a repeated expression: “A” gave birth to “B”. But now we have a record of birth 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 type of betrothal (but carried a greater degree of responsibility than today), and it could only be dissolved 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.

While betrothed, the Virgin Mary miraculously became pregnant Holy Spirit. An 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 before 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 I did not yet know the true explanation of Mary’s condition. He could be angry with his fiancée for two reasons: first, for her obvious infidelity to him; and, secondly, for the fact that he would certainly be accused of complicity, although it was not his fault. His love for Mary and his desire to do justice prompted him to try to break off the engagement by an unofficial divorce. He wanted to avoid the public shame that usually accompanied such an affair.

1,20 While this noble and prudent man was considering his strategy for the defense of Mary, The 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 origin and to prepare him for the unusual coming of the Israeli Messiah-King. He should have no doubts about marrying Maria. Any suspicions regarding her integrity were unfounded. Her pregnancy is a miracle, perfect By the 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. This 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 recognized 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 dogma, now came to life. Isaiah's mysterious prophecy is now fulfilled in Mary's Child: “And all this happened, that what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet might be fulfilled...” Matthew claims that the words of Isaiah, which the Lord spoke through him at least 700 years before Christ, were inspired from above.

1,23 The prophecy of Isaiah 7:14 predicted a unique birth (“Behold, the Virgin shall be with child”), gender (“and she shall bear a Son”), and the name of the Child (“and they shall call His name Immanuel”). Matthew adds the explanation that Emmanuel Means "God is with us". It is not recorded anywhere that during Christ’s life on earth He was ever called “Immanuel.” His name was always "Jesus". However, the essence of the name Jesus (see v. 21) implies the presence God is with us. Perhaps Emmanuel is a title of Christ that will be used primarily at His second coming.

1,24 Thanks to 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 teaching that Mary remained a virgin throughout her life is refuted by the marriage mentioned in this verse. Other references indicating that Mary had children with 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. Having obeyed the angelic guest, Joseph gave Baby name Jesus.

Thus the Messiah-King was born. The Eternal One has entered into time. The Almighty became a gentle 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).

Comments on Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION TO THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

SYNOPTIC GOSPELS

The Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke are usually called 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 in 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 arranged in the same way. Therefore, they can be written in parallel columns and compared with each other.

After this, it becomes very obvious that they are very close to each other. If, for example, we compare the story of the feeding of the five thousand (Matthew 14:12-21; Mark 6:30-44; Luke 5:17-26), then this is the same story, told in almost the same words.

Or take, for example, another story about the healing of a paralytic (Matthew 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, “said to the paralytic,” appear in all three stories in the same form in the same place. The correspondence between all three Gospels is so close that one must either conclude that all three took material from the same source, or two were based on a third.

THE FIRST GOSPEL

Examining 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 are found in the Gospel of Matthew and 81 in the Gospel of Luke. Only four of the 105 passages in the Gospel of Mark are not found in either the Gospel of Matthew or the Gospel of Luke. There are 661 verses in the Gospel of Mark, 1068 verses in the Gospel of Matthew, and 1149 in the Gospel of Luke. There are no less than 606 verses from Mark in the Gospel of Matthew, and 320 in the Gospel of Luke. Of the 55 verses in 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 Matthew or Luke have differences from the Gospel of Mark, but it is never the case that they both were different from him. One of them always follows the order that Mark follows.

REVISION OF THE GOSPEL OF MARK

Due to the fact that the Gospels of Matthew and Luke are much larger in volume than the Gospel of Mark, one might think that the Gospel of Mark is a brief transcription of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke. But one fact indicates that the Gospel of Mark is the earliest of them all: so to speak, the authors of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke improve 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 everyone sick."

Onion. 4.40:"He, laying on everyone of them hands, healed

Or let's take another example:

Map. 3:10: “For He healed many.”

Mat. 12:15: “He healed them all.”

Onion. 6:19: "... power came from Him and healed everyone."

Approximately the same change is noted in the description of Jesus' visit to Nazareth. Let's compare this description in the Gospels of Matthew and Mark:

Map. 6.5.6: “And he could not perform any miracle there... and he marveled at their unbelief.”

Mat. 13:58: “And he did not perform 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 authors of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke leave out little hints from the Gospel of Mark that may somehow detract from the greatness of Jesus. The Gospels of Matthew and Luke omit three remarks found in the Gospel of Mark:

Map. 3.5:“And he looked upon them with anger, grieving because of the hardness of their hearts...”

Map. 3.21:“And when his neighbors heard, 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 earlier than the others. It gives a simple, lively and direct account, and the authors of Matthew and Luke were already beginning to be influenced by dogmatic and theological considerations, and therefore they chose their words more carefully.

TEACHINGS OF JESUS

We have already seen that the Gospel of Matthew has 1068 verses and the Gospel of Luke 1149 verses, and that 582 of these 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 among 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's where we see the difference: the material that the authors 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 shared by the Gospels of Matthew and Luke deal with something other than that. that Jesus did, but what 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. This book must have been extremely important in those days because it was the first textbook 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 was a witness to 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 the author of the Gospel of Matthew does. 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 the Hebrew language.”

Thus, we can consider that it was Matthew who wrote the book from which all people should draw as a source who want to know what Jesus taught. It was 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 to him the Sermon on the Mount and almost everything we know about the teaching of Jesus. In other words, it is to the author of the Gospel of Mark that we owe our knowledge of life events Jesus, and Matthew - knowledge of the essence teachings Jesus.

MATTHEW THE TANKER

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 should have hated him terribly, because the Jews hated their fellow tribesmen who served the victors. Matthew must have been a traitor in their eyes.

But Matthew had one gift. Most of Jesus' disciples were fishermen and did not have the talent to put words on paper, but Matthew was supposed to be an expert in this matter. When Jesus called Matthew, who was sitting at the toll booth, he stood up and, leaving everything but his pen, followed Him. Matthew nobly used his literary talent 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, so that when reading it we will pay attention to this.

First, and above all, the Gospel of Matthew - this is the gospel written for the Jews. It was written by a Jew to convert the Jews.

One of the main purposes of Matthew's Gospel was to show that in Jesus all the Old Testament prophecies were fulfilled and therefore He must be the Messiah. One phrase, a recurring theme, runs throughout the book: “It came to pass that God spoke by the prophet.” This phrase is repeated in the Gospel of Matthew no less than 16 times. The Birth of Jesus and His Name - Fulfillment of Prophecy (1, 21-23); as well as flight to Egypt (2,14.15); massacre of the innocents (2,16-18); Joseph's settlement in Nazareth and the raising 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 Jesus' clothes as He hung on the Cross (27,35). The author of the Gospel of Matthew made it his main goal to show that the Old Testament prophecies were fulfilled in Jesus, that every detail of Jesus' life was foretold by the prophets, and thereby 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 appeal is closest and dearest to his heart. To the Canaanite woman who turned to Him for help, Jesus first answered: “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 told them: “Do not go into the way of the Gentiles and do not enter the city of Samaritans, but go especially to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” (10, 5.6). But one must not think that this Gospel excludes the pagans in every possible way. Many will come from the east and 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 order was given to the Church to set out on a campaign: “Go therefore and teach all nations.” (28,19). It is, of course, obvious that the author of Matthew's Gospel is primarily interested in the Jews, but he foresees the day when all nations will be gathered together.

The Jewish origin and Jewish orientation of the Gospel of Matthew is also evident in its attitude towards the law. Jesus did not come to destroy the law, but to fulfill it. Not even the smallest part of the law will pass. There is no need to teach people to break the law. The righteousness of a Christian must exceed 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 saw that it had a place in Christian teaching. In addition, we should note the obvious paradox in the attitude of the author of the Gospel of Matthew to the scribes and Pharisees. He recognizes their special powers: “The scribes and Pharisees sat in 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 as 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 "born of vipers" (3, 7-12). They complain that Jesus eats and drinks with publicans and sinners (9,11); they declared that Jesus casts out demons not by the power of God, but by the power of the prince of demons (12,24). They are plotting to destroy Him (12,14); Jesus warns the disciples to beware not 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 cannot discern the signs of the times (16,3); they are killers of prophets (21,41). There is no other chapter in the entire New Testament like Mat. 23, in which it is not what the scribes and Pharisees teach that is condemned, but their behavior and way of life. The author condemns them for the fact that they do not at all correspond to the teaching they preach, and do not at all achieve the ideal established by them and for them.

The author of Matthew's Gospel is also very interested in the Church. From all the Synoptic Gospels the word Church found only in the Gospel of Matthew. Only the Gospel of Matthew includes a passage about the Church after Peter's confession at Caesarea Philippi (Matthew 16:13-23; cf. Mark 8:27-33; Luke 9:18-22). Only Matthew says that disputes should be resolved by the Church (18,17). By the time the Gospel of Matthew was written, the Church had become a large organization and truly a major factor in the lives of Christians.

The Gospel of Matthew especially reflects an interest in the apocalyptic; in other words, to what Jesus spoke about His Second Coming, the end of the world and the Day of Judgment. IN Mat. 24 provides a much more complete account of Jesus' apocalyptic reasoning than any other Gospel. Only in the Gospel of Matthew is there a parable of the talents. (25,14-30); about 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 an eminently meaningful gospel.

We have already seen that it was the Apostle Matthew who gathered the first meeting and compiled an anthology of Jesus’ teaching. Matthew was a great systematizer. He collected in one place everything he knew about the teaching of Jesus on this or that issue, and therefore we find in the Gospel of Matthew five large complexes in which the teaching of Christ is collected and systematized. All these five complexes are associated with the Kingdom of God. Here they are:

a) Sermon on the Mount or Law of the Kingdom (5-7)

b) Duty of Kingdom Leaders (10)

c) Parables about the Kingdom (13)

d) Greatness and Forgiveness in the Kingdom (18)

e) The Coming of the King (24,25)

But Matthew not only collected and systematized. We must remember that he wrote in an era before printing, when books were few and far between because they had to be copied by hand. At such a time, comparatively few people had books, and so 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 threes and sevens: three messages of Joseph, three denials of Peter, three questions of Pontius Pilate, seven parables about the Kingdom in chapter 13, sevenfold "woe to you" to the Pharisees and scribes in Chapter 23.

A good example of this is the genealogy of Jesus, with which the Gospel opens. The purpose of a genealogy is to prove that Jesus is the son of David. There are no numbers in Hebrew, they are symbolized by letters; In addition, Hebrew does not have signs (letters) for vowel sounds. David in Hebrew it will be accordingly DVD; if these are taken as numbers rather than letters, their sum would be 14, and the genealogy of Jesus consists of three groups of names, each containing fourteen names. Matthew does his best to arrange Jesus' teachings in a way that people can understand and remember.

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 one more feature: the dominant thought in it is the thought of Jesus the King. The author writes this Gospel to show the kingship and royal origin of Jesus.

The genealogy must prove from the very beginning that Jesus is the son of King David (1,1-17). This title Son of David is used more often in the Gospel of Matthew than in any other Gospel. (15,22; 21,9.15). The Magi came to see the King of the Jews (2,2); Jesus' triumphal entry into Jerusalem is a deliberately dramatized declaration by Jesus of His rights as King (21,1-11). Before Pontius Pilate, Jesus consciously accepts 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 the royal words: “But I say to 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.

FROM MATTHEW THE HOLY GOSPEL (Matthew 1:1-17)

It may seem to the modern reader that Matthew chose a very strange beginning for his Gospel, placing 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, this was the most correct way to begin the story of a person’s life.

The Jews were extremely interested in genealogies. Matthew calls it genealogy 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 that he said he found in the archives.

The interest in genealogies was explained by the fact that the Jews attached great importance to the purity of their origin. A person whose blood contained the slightest admixture of foreign 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 list of his genealogy from Aaron himself, without any omissions, and if he got married, then his wife had to present her genealogy back at least five generations back. When Ezra made a change in worship after the return of Israel from exile and re-established the priesthood, the sons of Habaiah, the sons of Hakkoz and the sons of Barzillai were excluded from the priesthood and were called unclean because “they sought their record of genealogy and it was not found.” (Ezra 2:62).

Genealogical archives were kept in the Sanhedrin. Pure-blooded 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 as to make it easier to remember. We must always remember 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 intended to be proof that Jesus was the Son of David and was designed to be easy to carry in the mind.

THREE STAGES (Matthew 1:1-17 (continued))

The very location of the genealogy is very symbolic for all human life. The genealogy is divided into three parts, each corresponding to one of the great stages in the history of Israel.

The first part covers the history before King David. David united Israel into a people and made Israel a strong power to be reckoned with in the world. The first part covers the history of Israel until the rise of its greatest king.

The second part covers the period before the Babylonian captivity. This part talks about the shame of the people, about their tragedy and misfortune.

The third part covers 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, according to our likeness" (Gen. 1:26). Man was created in the image of God. Man was destined to be in friendship with God. He was created to be akin to God. As the great Roman thinker Cicero saw it: “The difference between man and God comes down only to time.” 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 of 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 become.” Man has used his given free will to openly defy and disobey God rather than enter into friendship and fellowship with Him. Left to his own devices, man frustrated God's plan in His creation.

3. Man can regain his greatness. Even after this, God did not leave man to the mercy of fate and his vices. God did not allow man to destroy himself with his recklessness, did not allow it all to end in tragedy. God sent His Son, Jesus Christ, into this world so that He could save man from the quagmire of sin in which he was mired, and free him from the chains of sin with which he had bound himself, so that through Him man could find the friendship he had lost with God.

In the genealogy of Jesus Christ, Matthew shows us the royal greatness found, the tragedy of freedom lost, and the glory of freedom regained. And this, by the grace of God, is the story of humanity and of every person.

REALIZING THE HUMAN DREAM (Matt. 1.1-17 (continued))

This passage highlights two things about Jesus.

1. It is emphasized here that Jesus is the Son of David; The genealogy was compiled mainly to prove this.

Peter emphasizes this in the first recorded sermon of the Christian Church (Acts 2:29-36). Paul speaks of Jesus Christ being born of the seed of David according to the flesh (Rom. 1:3). The author of the Pastoral Epistles urges people to remember Jesus Christ of the seed of David, who rose from the dead (2 Tim. 2.8). The author of the revelation hears the Risen Christ say: “I am the root and descendant of David.” (Rev. 22:16).

This is how Jesus is addressed repeatedly in the gospel story. After the healing of the demon-possessed blind and dumb, the people said: “Is this the Christ, the Son of David?” (Matthew 12:23). A woman from Tire and Sidon, who sought Jesus’ help for her daughter, turns to Him: “Son of David!” (Matthew 15:22). The blind men shouted: “Have mercy on us, O Lord, Son of David!” (Matthew 20,30,31). And how the crowd greets the Son of David as he enters Jerusalem for the last time (Matthew 21.9.15).

It is very significant that Jesus was so welcomed by the crowd. The Jews were expecting something unusual; they never forgot and could never forget that they were God's chosen people. Although their entire history was a long chain of defeats and misfortunes, although they were a forced conquered people, they never forgot the plans of their destiny. And the common people dreamed that a descendant of King David would come to this world and lead them to glory, which they believed was rightfully theirs.

In other words, Jesus was the answer to the people's dream. People, however, see only answers to their dreams of power, wealth, material abundance and the fulfillment of their cherished ambitions. But if man's dreams of peace and beauty, greatness and satisfaction are ever destined to come true, then they can only find fulfillment in Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ and the life He offers people is the answer to people's dreams. There is a passage in the story of Joseph that goes far beyond the scope of the story itself. Along with Joseph in prison were also the chief court cupbearer and the chief court baker. They saw dreams that disturbed them, and they cried out in horror: “We have seen dreams, but there is no one to interpret them” (Gen. 40:8). Just because a person is a person, he is always haunted by a dream, and its fulfillment lies in Jesus Christ.

2. This passage emphasizes that Jesus is the fulfillment of all prophecies: in Him the message of the prophets was fulfilled. Today we do not pay much attention to prophecy and, for the most part, do not want to look for sayings in the Old Testament that were fulfilled in the New Testament. But there is a great and eternal truth in the prophecy: this universe has a purpose and God's purpose for it, and God wants to carry out His specific purposes in it.

One play deals with a time of terrible famine in Ireland in the nineteenth century. Having found nothing better and knowing no other solution, the government sent people to dig roads that were not needed in a completely unknown direction. One of the heroes of the play, Michael, having learned about this, left his job and, returning home, told 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 leading to nowhere. We may view prophecy differently than our ancestors, but behind prophecy is the enduring fact that life and peace are not a road to nowhere, but a path to God's goal.

NOT THE RIGHTEOUS, BUT SINNERS (Matthew 1:1-17 (continued))

The most striking thing about the genealogy is the names of the women. In general, female names are extremely rare in Jewish genealogies. The woman had no legal rights; they looked at her not as a person, but as a thing; she was only the property of her father or husband and they could do with her as they pleased. In his daily morning prayer, the Jew thanked God for not making him a pagan, a slave, or a woman. In general, the very existence of these names in the genealogy is an extremely amazing and unusual phenomenon.

But if you look at these women - who they were and what they did - you have to be even more surprised. Rahab, or Rahab as she is called in the Old Testament, was the harlot of Jericho (Joshua 2:1-7). Ruth was not even a Jew, but a Moabite (Ruth. 1:4), and does not the law say: “An Ammonite and a 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 hateful people. Tamar was a skilled seductress (Gen. 38). Bathsheba, Solomon's mother, was most cruelly taken by David from Uriah, her husband. (2 Kings 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 also something very remarkable about 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 the barriers are falling.

1. The barrier between Jew and Gentile has disappeared. Rahab, a woman from Jericho, and Ruth, a Moabite woman, found a place in the genealogy of Jesus Christ. This already reflects the truth that in Christ there is neither Jew nor Greek. The universalism of the Gospel and the love of God is already visible here.

2. Barriers between women and men have disappeared. There were no female names in the normal genealogy, but there were female names in the genealogy of Jesus. The old contempt has passed; 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 one who has sinned a lot. “I have not come,” says Jesus, “to call the righteous, but sinners.” (Matthew 9:13).

Already here at the very beginning of the Gospel there are indications of the all-encompassing love of God. God may find His servants among those from whom respected orthodox Jews would shudder.

ENTRY OF THE SAVIOR INTO THE WORLD (Matthew 1:18-25)

Such relationships can confuse us. Firstly, it talks about engagement Mary, then about what Joseph wanted secretly let go her, and then she's named wife his. But this relationship reflects the usual Jewish marriage relationship and procedure, which consisted of several stages.

1. Firstly, matchmaking. It was often committed 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. Secondly, engagement. Engagement can be called a confirmation of the matchmaking concluded between the couple earlier. At this moment, the matchmaking could be interrupted at the request of the girl. If the engagement took place, 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 you 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 betrothed, 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 Jewish marriage customs, it becomes clear that this passage describes the most typical and normal relationship.

Thus, before the marriage, Joseph was told that the Virgin Mary would give birth to a Child by the Holy Spirit, who was to be named Jesus. Jesus - this 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 a King. He came into this world not for His own sake, but for the sake of people and for the sake of our salvation.

BORN OF THE HOLY SPIRIT (Matthew 1:18-25 (continued))

This passage tells us that Jesus will be born of the Holy Spirit in the virgin birth. 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 most important 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 that the birth of Jesus is the result of the work of the Holy Spirit. “It turned out that She (Virgin Mary) was pregnant with the Holy Spirit.” "That which is born in her is of the Holy Spirit." What then does it mean to say that the Holy Spirit took a special part in the birth of Jesus?

According to the Jewish worldview, the Holy Spirit had certain functions. We cannot put all of this into this passage. Christian ideas of the Holy Spirit, since Joseph could not yet know anything about it, and therefore we must interpret it in the light Jewish the idea of ​​the Holy Spirit, for Joseph would have put that idea into the passage because it was the only one he knew.

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 God's people what they should do; Throughout all centuries and generations, the Holy Spirit has brought God's truth to people. And therefore Jesus is the One who brings God's truth to people.

Let's put it another way. 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 like. Until Jesus came, people had only vague and unclear, and often completely wrong, ideas about God. They could, at best, guess and go by feel; and Jesus could say: “Whoever has seen Me has seen the Father.” (John 14:9). In Jesus, as nowhere else in the world, we see love, compassion, mercy, a seeking heart and the purity of God. With the coming of Jesus, the time of guessing ended and the time of certainty came. Before Jesus came, people did not know at all what virtue was. 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 brought God’s truth to people, but also gives them the ability to recognize 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 that 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 spent half her life visiting the sights and art galleries of the world. Eventually, she was tired; Nothing could surprise or interest her anymore. But one day she meets a man who has few material goods of this world, but who truly knows and loves beauty. They start traveling together and everything changes for this woman. “I never knew what things looked 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 to see the world and things correctly.

CREATION AND RE-CREATION (Matthew 1:18-25 (continued))

3. In a special way the Jews connected the Holy Spirit with creation. God created the world by His Spirit. At the very beginning, the Spirit of God hovered over the waters and out of chaos the world became (Gen. 1,2).“By the word of the Lord were the heavens made,” said the psalmist, “and by the breath of his mouth were all their hosts.” (Ps. 33:6).(As in Hebrew ruach, same in Greek pneuma, mean at the same time spirit And breath)."If you send your spirit, they will be created" (Ps. 103:30).“The Spirit of God created me,” says Job, “and the breath of the Almighty gave me life.” (Job 33:4).

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 primordial chaos has now come to us to bring order to our disordered lives. The power that breathed life into that which had no life came to breathe life into our weakness and our vanity. It can be said this way: 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 recreation. Ezekiel has a grim picture of a field full of bones. He tells how these bones came to life, and then he hears the voice of God saying: “And I will put My Spirit in you, and you will live.” (Ezek. 37:1-14). The rabbis had this saying: “God said to Israel: ‘In this world My Spirit has given you wisdom, but in the hereafter My Spirit will give you life again.’ The Spirit of God can awaken to life people who are lost in sin and deafness.

Thus, through Jesus Christ, the power to recreate life came into this world. Jesus can revive again a soul lost in sin; He can revive dead ideals; He can once again give strength to the fallen to strive for virtue. It can renew life when people have lost everything that life means.

So, this chapter does not only say that Jesus Christ was born of a virgin. The essence of Matthew's account is that the Spirit of God was more involved in the birth of Jesus than ever before in the world. The Spirit brings the truth of God to the people; The Spirit enables men to know the truth when they see it; The 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 the creative power that came to people; Jesus is a creative force capable of freeing human souls from sinful death.

Commentary (introduction) to the entire book of Matthew

Comments on Chapter 1

In the grandeur of the concept and the force with which the mass of material is subordinated to great ideas, no Scripture of the New or Old Testaments dealing with historical subjects can be compared with the Gospel of Matthew.

Theodore Zahn

Introduction

I. SPECIAL POSITION 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. Due to its emotionality, strong Jewish flavor, many quotations from the Jewish Scriptures and position at the head of all books of the New Testament. Matthew represents 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 regular member of the apostolic group, it would seem strange if the first Gospel was 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, the church historian, quotes Papias, who stated that "Matthew wrote "Logic" in the Hebrew language, and each one interprets it as he can." Irenaeus, Pantaine and Origen generally agree on this. It is widely believed that "Hebrew" is a dialect of Aramaic used by the Jews in the time of our Lord, as this word occurs in the NT. But what is "logic"? Usually this Greek word means "revelations", because in the OT there are revelations God's. In Papias's statement it cannot have 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 Jews to Christ and instruct Jewish Christians, and only later did the Greek version appear; (2) it only applies to statements Jesus, which were later transferred to his Gospel; (3) it refers to "testimony", i.e. quotes from Old Testament Scriptures to show that Jesus is the Messiah. The first and second opinions are more likely.

Matthew's Greek does not read as an explicit translation; but such a widespread tradition (in the absence of early disagreements) 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 did Greek final version for universal use. Joseph, a contemporary of Matthew, did the same. This Jewish historian made the first draft of his "Jewish War" in Aramaic , and then finalized the book in Greek.

Internal evidence The first Gospels are very suitable for a pious 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 in power. (The Romans used Greek, not Latin, in the East.) The details of numbers, parables involving money, financial terms, and an expressive, regular style were all perfectly suited to his profession as a tax collector. The highly educated, non-conservative scholar accepts Matthew as the author of this Gospel in part and under the influence of his compelling internal evidence.

Despite such universal external and corresponding internal evidence, most scientists reject The traditional opinion is that this book was written by the publican Matthew. 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 Gospels are also in the other Gospels.) In answer to this question, first of all we will say: not proven that Ev. 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 “Markian Majority” (and many conservatives do), Matthew might concede that much of Mark’s work was influenced by the energetic Simon Peter, Matthew’s co-apostle, 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 to be 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 characteristics of the publican’s character explain this very well. To give more space to our Lord's speeches, Levi had to give less space to unnecessary details. The same would have happened with Mark if he had written first, and Matthew had seen the traits inherent directly in Peter.

III. WRITING TIME

If the widespread belief that Matthew first wrote the Aramaic version of the Gospel (or at least the sayings of Jesus) is correct, then the date of writing is 45 AD. e., fifteen years after the ascension, completely coincides with ancient legends. He probably completed his more complete, canonical Gospel in Greek in 50-55, and perhaps later.

The view that the Gospel there must be written after the destruction of Jerusalem (70 AD), is based, rather, on disbelief in the ability of Christ to predict future events in detail and other rationalistic theories that ignore or reject inspiration.

IV. PURPOSE OF WRITING AND TOPIC

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 his many rewards was that he was 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 one 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 contender for the throne of David.

The book does not purport to be a complete account of the life of Christ. It begins with His genealogy and childhood, then moves on to the beginning of His public ministry, when He was about thirty years of age. Under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, Matthew selects those aspects of the Savior's life and ministry that testify to Him as Anointed God (which is what the word “Messiah” or “Christ” means). The book takes us to the culmination of events: the suffering, death, resurrection and ascension of the Lord Jesus.

And in this culmination, of course, lies the basis for human salvation.

That 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, thanks to which this salvation was made possible.

Bible Commentaries for Christians does not aim to be exhaustive or technical, but rather to inspire personal reflection and study of the Word. And most of all, they are aimed at creating in the reader’s heart a strong desire for the return of the King.

"And even I, with my heart burning more and more,
And even I, nourishing sweet hope,
I sigh heavily, my Christ,
About the hour when you return,
Losing courage at the sight
Burning steps of Your coming."

F. W. G. Mayer ("St. Paul")

Plan

GENEALOGY AND BIRTH OF THE MESSIAH-KING (CHAPTER 1)

THE EARLY YEARS OF THE MESSIAH KING (CHAPTER 2)

PREPARATION FOR THE MESSIANIC MINISTRY AND ITS BEGINNING (CHAP. 3-4)

ORDER OF THE KINGDOM (CHAP. 5-7)

MIRACLES OF GRACE AND POWERS CREATED BY THE MESSIAH AND DIFFERENT REACTIONS TO THEM (8.1 - 9.34)

GROWING OPPOSITION AND REJECTION OF THE MESSIAH (CHAP. 11-12)

THE KING REJECTED BY ISRAEL DECLARES A NEW, INTERMEDIATE FORM OF THE KINGDOM (CHAPTER 13)

THE MESSIAH'S TIRESLESS GRACE MEETS INCREASING HOSTILITY (14:1 - 16:12)

THE KING PREPARES HIS DISCIPLES (16.13 - 17.27)

THE KING GIVES INSTRUCTION TO HIS DISCIPLES (CHAP. 18-20)

INTRODUCTION AND REJECTION OF THE KING (CHAP. 21-23)

THE KING'S SPEECH ON THE MOUNT OF OLIVES (CHAP. 24-25)

SUFFERING AND DEATH OF THE KING (CHAP. 26-27)

TRIUMPH OF THE KING (CHAPTER 28)

I. GENEALOGY AND BIRTH OF THE MESSIAH-KING (Ch. 1)

A. Genealogy of Jesus Christ (1:1-17)

From a casual reading of the NT, the reader may wonder why this book begins with such a boring topic as the family tree. Someone may decide that there is nothing terrible if they ignore this list of names and move past it to the place where the events began.

However, a pedigree is extremely necessary. 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 story exactly where he should have started: with documentary evidence that Jesus inherited the rightful right to the throne of David through His stepfather Joseph.

This genealogy shows Jesus' legal descent as King of Israel; in the genealogy of Ev. Luke shows His hereditary descent as the Son of David. Matthew's genealogy follows the royal line from David through his

son of Solomon, the next king; Luke's genealogy is based on consanguinity through another son, Nathan. This genealogy includes Joseph, who adopted Jesus; the genealogy in Luke 3 traces probably the ancestors of Mary, of whom Jesus was the natural son.

A thousand years earlier, God made an alliance with David, promising him a kingdom that would never end and an unbroken line of rulers (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 necessary conditions necessary to claim the throne of Israel (legal and hereditary). And since He is alive now, there can be no other contenders.

1,1 -15 Formulation "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" ("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 by the word "Lord". The same can be said of 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 Jehoiachin to Joseph. The first segment leads to David, the second covers the period of the kingdom, the third period includes a list of people of royal descent during their stay in exile (586 BC onwards).

There are many interesting details in this list. For example, four women are mentioned here: Tamar, Rahab, Ruth And Bathsheba (who was behind Urieah). 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 pagans (Rahab and Ruth).

The fact that they are included in the introductory part of Ev. 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 barriers of race and sex will be broken down.

It is also interesting to mention the king by name Jeconiah. In Jeremiah 22:30, God pronounced a curse on this man: “Thus says the Lord: Write down this man childless, an unfortunate man in his days, for no one from his seed will sit on the throne of David or rule in Judah.”

If Jesus had truly been 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 resolved 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 the word is singular and feminine, indicating that Jesus was born from Maria, not from Joseph. But, in addition to these interesting details of the genealogy, it is also worth mentioning the controversy contained in it.

1,17 Matthew draws special attention to the presence of three groups according to fourteen births in each. However, we know from the OT that there are some names missing from his list. For example, between Jehoram and Uzziah (v. 8) Ahaziah, Joash and Amaziah reigned (see 2 Kings 8 - 14; 2 Chron. 21 - 25). Both Matthew and Luke mention two identical names: Shealtiel 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 individuals, and then diverge again. It becomes even more difficult to understand when we notice that both Gospels refer to Ezra 3:2, classifying Zerubbabel as the sons of Shealtiel, while in 1 Chronicles 3:19 he is recorded as the son of Pedaiah.

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, such a difference in the number of generations still seems strange.

What position should the student of the Bible take in regard to these difficulties and apparent contradictions? First, our fundamental premise is that the Bible is the inspired Word of God and therefore cannot contain errors. 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 likely to be a lack of knowledge than a biblical error. Difficult passages should motivate us to study the Bible and seek answers. “It is the glory of God to conceal a matter, but the glory of kings is to search out a matter” (Proverbs 25:2).

Careful research by historians and archaeological excavations have failed 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 born of Mary (1:18-25)

1,18 Birth of Jesus Christ was different from the birth of other people mentioned in the genealogy. There we found a repeated expression: “A” gave birth to “B”. But now we have a record of birth 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 type of betrothal (but carried a greater degree of responsibility than today), and it could only be dissolved 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.

While betrothed, the Virgin Mary miraculously became pregnant Holy Spirit. An 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 before 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 I did not yet know the true explanation of Mary’s condition. He could be angry with his fiancée for two reasons: first, for her obvious infidelity to him; and, secondly, for the fact that he would certainly be accused of complicity, although it was not his fault. His love for Mary and his desire to do justice prompted him to try to break off the engagement by an unofficial divorce. He wanted to avoid the public shame that usually accompanied such an affair.

1,20 While this noble and prudent man was considering his strategy for the defense of Mary, The 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 origin and to prepare him for the unusual coming of the Israeli Messiah-King. He should have no doubts about marrying Maria. Any suspicions regarding her integrity were unfounded. Her pregnancy is a miracle, perfect By the 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. This 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 recognized 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 dogma, now came to life. Isaiah's mysterious prophecy is now fulfilled in Mary's Child: “And all this happened, that what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet might be fulfilled...” Matthew claims that the words of Isaiah, which the Lord spoke through him at least 700 years before Christ, were inspired from above.

1,23 The prophecy of Isaiah 7:14 predicted a unique birth (“Behold, the Virgin shall be with child”), gender (“and she shall bear a Son”), and the name of the Child (“and they shall call His name Immanuel”). Matthew adds the explanation that Emmanuel Means "God is with us". It is not recorded anywhere that during Christ’s life on earth He was ever called “Immanuel.” His name was always "Jesus". However, the essence of the name Jesus (see v. 21) implies the presence God is with us. Perhaps Emmanuel is a title of Christ that will be used primarily at His second coming.

1,24 Thanks to 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 teaching that Mary remained a virgin throughout her life is refuted by the marriage mentioned in this verse. Other references indicating that Mary had children with 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. Having obeyed the angelic guest, Joseph gave Baby name Jesus.

Thus the Messiah-King was born. The Eternal One has entered into time. The Almighty became a gentle 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).

Commentary on the book

Comment to the section

1 "Genealogy" (lit., "genaological book") of Christ was compiled by the evangelist according to the model of the Old Testament genealogies ( Genesis 5 sl, 1 Par 1:1 sl). The author's purpose is twofold - to point out the continuity between the two Testaments and to emphasize the messiahship of Jesus (according to the promise, the Messiah was supposed to be a “son”, i.e. a descendant of David). "Jesus" is a common Jewish name (Hebrew) Joshua", aram" Yeshua"), meaning "The Lord is his salvation." "Christ" is a Greek word meaning the same as the Hebrew Messiah (Heb. " Mashiach", aram" Mashikha"), i.e. the Anointed One, sanctified by holy unction. This is the name given to people dedicated to serving God (prophets, kings), as well as the Savior promised in the OT. The genealogy opens with the name of Abraham as the forefather of the people of God, “the father of believers.”

2-17 “Begat” is a Semitic phrase denoting descent in a straight line. Unlike genealogy Luke 3:23-38), Matthew's genealogy is more schematic. The evangelist seems to represent in names the entire Old Testament history, mainly of 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: Rahab, a Canaanite, and Ruth, a Moabite; Bathsheba, the wife of Uriah the Hittite, and Tamar were 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. Genealogy, in accordance with Eastern custom, is conducted through the line of Joseph, and not the Virgin Mary. However, Her royal origin is implicitly recognized here (cf. Luke 1:27-38). The difference between the genealogies in Luke and Matthew stems from the legal consequences of the so-called levirate: the levirate is called the Mosaic institution ( Deuteronomy 25:5; Matthew 22:24 cl), by virtue of which the brother of an Israeli who died childless was obliged to marry his widow, and the first son from this marriage was considered the son of the deceased (the widow’s first husband). Julius Africanus (died 237), who was familiar with the records of the genealogical traditions of the descendants of David, reports that Eli, the father of St. Joseph, Mary's betrothed, according to the genealogy of Luke, 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 by the law of the levirate to be 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 only be terminated in accordance with the statute contained in the Mosaic legislation. Joseph, having learned that Mary was expecting a child not conceived from him, and at the same time knowing about her virtue, did not understand what had happened. “Being righteous,” he wanted to “secretly release her” so that she would not be put to death as prescribed by the Mosaic Law ( Tue 22:20 sll). On the "birth of the Holy Spirit" see Luke 1 26 ff.

23 "Virgo" - this verse is borrowed from the book. Is (cm Isa 7:14). In the Hebrew text it says " Alma", which is usually translated as "young woman." The 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" (Hebrew) - "God is with us."

24-25 "Joseph... did not know Her, how She finally 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 ever-virginity.

1. Evangelist Matthew (which means “gift of God”) belonged to the Twelve Apostles (Matthew 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13). Luke (Luke 5:27) calls him Levi, and Mark (Mark 2:14) calls him Levi of Alpheus, i.e. son of Alphaeus: it is known that some Jews had two names (for example, Joseph Barnabas or Joseph Caiaphas). Matthew was a tax collector (tax collector) at the Capernaum customs house, located on the shore of the Sea of ​​Galilee (Mark 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 him to know Greek. 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 appears 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 (the Hebrew language here should be understood as the Aramaic dialect), and 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. The message Papius repeats ca. 170 St. Irenaeus of Lyons, emphasizing that the evangelist wrote for Jewish Christians (Against heresies. III.1.1.). The historian Eusebius (IV century) writes that “Matthew, having preached first to the Jews, and then, intending to go to others, set forth in the native language the Gospel, now known under his name” (Church History, III.24). According to most modern researchers, this Aramaic Gospel (Logia) appeared between the 40s and 50s. Matthew probably made his first notes while he was accompanying the Lord.

The original Aramaic text of the Gospel of Matthew is lost. We only have 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. from Matthew arose in Antioch, where, along with Jewish Christians, large groups of pagan Christians first appeared.

3. Text Ev. Matthew indicates that its author was a Palestinian Jew. He is well acquainted with the Old Testament, with the geography, history and customs of his people. His Ev. is closely connected with the tradition of the OT: 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 pagans. 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 he, in accordance with Jewish tradition, usually calls the Kingdom of Heaven). It resides in heaven, and comes to this world in the person of the Messiah. The good news of the Lord is the good news of the mystery of the Kingdom (Matthew 13:11). It means the reign of God among people. At first 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 predicted 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 Matthew: 1. Prologue. The birth and childhood of Christ (Mt 1-2); 2. The Baptism of the Lord and the beginning of the sermon (Matthew 3-4); 3. Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7); 4. The ministry of Christ in Galilee. Miracles. Those who accepted and rejected Him (Matthew 8-18); 5. The road to Jerusalem (Matthew 19-25); 6. Passions. Resurrection (Matthew 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, according to tradition, was 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 ancient Greek language and was not, as previously thought, a special New Testament language. It is a spoken everyday language of the first century A.D., which spread throughout the Greco-Roman world and is known in science as “κοινη”, i.e. "ordinary adverb"; yet both the style, the turns of phrase, and the way of thinking of the sacred writers of the New Testament reveal 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 further than the 4th century no P.X. But recently, many fragments of ancient NT manuscripts on papyrus (3rd and even 2nd century) have been discovered. For example, Bodmer's manuscripts: 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 most ancient existed already from the 2nd century AD.

Finally, numerous quotes from the Church Fathers have been preserved in Greek and other languages ​​in such quantities that if the text of the New Testament were lost and all the ancient manuscripts were destroyed, then experts could restore this text from quotes from the works of the Holy Fathers. All this abundant material makes it possible to check and clarify the text of the NT and classify its various forms (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 in the number of manuscripts, and in the shortness of time separating the oldest of them from the original, and in the number of translations, and in their antiquity, and in the seriousness and volume of critical work carried out on the text, it surpasses all other texts (for details, see “Hidden Treasures and new life,” archaeological discoveries and the Gospel, Bruges, 1959, pp. 34 ff.). The text of the NT as a whole is recorded completely irrefutably.

The New Testament consists of 27 books. The publishers have divided them into 260 chapters of unequal length to accommodate references and quotations. This division is not present in the original text. The modern division into chapters in the New Testament, as in the whole Bible, has often been attributed to the Dominican Cardinal Hugo (1263), who worked it out in his symphony to the Latin Vulgate, but it is now thought with greater reason that this division goes back to Archbishop Stephen 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 in his edition in 1551.

The sacred books of the New Testament are usually divided into laws (the Four Gospels), historical (the Acts of the Apostles), teaching (seven conciliar epistles and fourteen epistles of the Apostle Paul) and prophetic: the Apocalypse or the Revelation of John the Theologian (see Long Catechism of St. Philaret of Moscow).

However, modern experts consider this distribution to be outdated: in fact, all the books of the New Testament are legal, historical and educational, and prophecy is not only in the Apocalypse. New Testament scholarship pays great attention to the precise establishment of the chronology of the Gospel and other New Testament events. Scientific chronology allows the reader to trace with sufficient accuracy through the New Testament the life and ministry of our Lord Jesus Christ, the apostles and the primitive Church (see Appendices).

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 relationships of the first three Gospels and their relation to the Gospel of John (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: 1st and 2nd 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 Timothy, Titus, 2nd Timothy.

e) Epistle to the Hebrews.

3) Council Epistles (“Corpus Catholicum”).

4) Revelation of John the Theologian. (Sometimes in the NT they distinguish “Corpus Joannicum”, i.e. everything that St. John wrote for the 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 what 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 the salvation given to the world through the incarnate Son of God.

Christ and His apostles preached the gospel without writing it down. By the mid-1st century, this preaching had been established by the Church in a strong oral tradition. The Eastern custom of memorizing sayings, stories, and even large texts helped Christians of the apostolic era accurately preserve the unrecorded First Gospel. After the 50s, when eyewitnesses of Christ's earthly ministry began to pass away one after another, the need arose to write down the gospel (Luke 1:1). Thus, “gospel” came to mean 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 (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John) 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 out in these books by these four sacred writers. Their gospels were not compiled into one book, which made it possible to see the gospel story from different points of view. In the 2nd century St. Irenaeus of Lyons 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, compiled from various texts of the four gospels, “Diatessaron”, i.e. "gospel of four"

3. The apostles did not set out to create 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, to 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 always have an individual coloring. 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 found in the presentation of the evangelists are explained by the fact that God gave the sacred writers complete freedom in conveying certain specific facts in relation to different categories of listeners, which further emphasizes the unity of meaning and orientation of all four gospels (see also General Introduction, pp. 13 and 14) .

Hide

Commentary on the current passage

Commentary on the book

Comment to the section

1 Inscription. The Gospel of Matthew in the Russian and Slavic translations has the same title. But this title is not similar to the title of the Gospel in Greek. It is not as clear there as in Russian and Slavic, and in short: “according to Matthew”; but there are no words “Gospel” or “good news”. The Greek expression "according to Matthew" requires explanation. Best explanation following. The Gospel is one and indivisible, and belongs to God, not to people. Different people only expounded the one good news, or Gospel, given to them by God. 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 general gospel about the one and indivisible Person of the God-Man. That is why 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 presentation 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 done already in ancient times, 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. So, in Acts 17:28 it says: “as some of your poets have said,” and in literal translation from Greek: “according to your poets” - and then they follow own words. One of the church fathers Epiphanius of Cyprus, speaks of "the first book of the Pentateuch according to Moses." (Panarius, haer. VIII, 4), meaning that the Pentateuch was written by Moses himself. In the Bible, the word gospel means good news (e.g. 2 Kings 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 set out from verse 1 to 17. In the Slavic translation, instead of “genealogy,” “book of kinship.” The Russian and Slavic translations, although accurate, are not literal. In Greek - vivlos geneseos (βίβλος γενέσεως). Vivlos means book, and geneseos (genus; eminent 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 comparatively slow birth, more the process of birth than the act itself, and the word implies generation, growth and final appearance into the world. This explains the connection between the Jewish 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 Greek vivlos geneseos. In Hebrew the plural is the book of births, and in the Greek the singular is geneseos, because the last word implies 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 clans) and Russian translations, if not completely, then approximately accurate, and admit that it is impossible to translate the Greek (“vivlos geneseos”) otherwise, and not with the word genealogy, for 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.

In what sense are the words “Jesus Christ” used in verse 1? Of course, in the meaning own name a well-known historical Person (and 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 vague. The evangelist wants to present the genealogy of Jesus, who has already become known to both Jews and pagans 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, transformed from Yeshua, or (before Babylon captivity) Yehoshua, meaning God the Savior. Same thing in verse 18. This name was usually used by 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 given to the Jewish kings, priests and prophets who were anointed with sacred oil, or oil. In the New Testament, the name became a proper name (as is usually indicated by the Greek member), but not immediately. According to the interpretation of blessed. Theophylact, the Lord is called Christ because, as a King, He reigned and reigns over sin; as a Priest, he made a sacrifice for us; and He was anointed, like the Lord, with true oil, the Holy Spirit.

Having named 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 (to be the seed of Abraham) and was unthinkable for them if he did not come from David and from Abraham. From some Gospel passages it is clear that the Jews not only implied 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 did not descend 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 the son of David, for example. Isaiah ( 9:7 ; 55:3 ). Jeremiah ( Jer 23:5), Ezekiel ( Eze 34:23; 37:25 ), Amos ( 9:11 ) etc. Therefore, having spoken about Christ, or the Messiah, the evangelist immediately says that He was the Son of David, the Son of Abraham, - 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 the Russian, there is some ambiguity. You can understand these words: Jesus Christ, Who was the Son (descendant) of David, who was (in turn) a descendant of Abraham. But it is also possible: the Son of David and the Son of Abraham. Both interpretations, of course, do not change the essence of the matter at all. If David was the son (descendant) of Abraham, then, of course, Christ, as the Son of David, was a descendant of Abraham. But the first interpretation corresponds more closely to the Greek text.

1:2 (Luke 3:34) Having said that Jesus Christ was the Son of David and the Son of Abraham, the evangelist, starting from verse 2, proves this idea in more detail. By naming Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Judas, the evangelist points to famous historical figures to whom promises were given that from them would come the Savior of the world ( 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. Hezrom, Aram, Amminadab and Nahshon were probably all born and lived in Egypt after Jacob and his sons migrated there. Hezrom, Aram and Amminadab are mentioned in 1 Chronicles 2:1-15 only by name, but nothing special is known. Nahshon's sister Elizabeth married Aaron, Moses' brother. IN 1 Par 2:10 And Numbers 2:3 Nahshon is called the “prince” or “chief” of the “sons of Judah.” He was among the people who were counting the people in the Sinai desert ( Numbers 1:7), and the first to offer sacrifice when setting up the tabernacle ( Numbers 7:2), approximately forty years before the capture of Jericho.

1:5 The son of Nahshon, Salmon, was among the spies in Jericho, whom the harlot Rahab hid in her house ( 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 (cf. Ruth 4:21; 1 Par 2:11). From this they conclude that the evangelist, when compiling his genealogy, “had access to information other than the Old Testament books.” The reading of the name Rahab is unsettled and indefinite: Rahab, Rahab, and in Josephus Flavius ​​- Rahab. 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 there were not only Jews, but also foreigners. From the accounts of Ruth in scripture, it can be concluded that her moral character was very attractive.

1:6 It is known about Jesse that he 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; During the time of Saul he reached old age and was the eldest among men. During Saul's persecution of David, he was in danger. Speaking about the birth of David from Jesse, the evangelist adds that Jesse gave birth to David as king. There is no such increase when mentioning other kings, descendants of David. Maybe because it was unnecessary; It was enough to call David alone king to show that the generation of kings—the ancestors of the Savior—began with him. David, among others, had sons Solomon and Nathan. Evangelist Matthew leads further genealogy through the line of Solomon, Luke ( Luke 3:31) - Nathana. Solomon was the son of David from one who was behind Urieah, that is, from such a woman who was previously behind Urieah. Details about this are set out in 2 Samuel ch. 11-12 and are generally known. The Evangelist does not call Bathsheba by name. But the mention of her here serves as an expression of the 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, was distinguished by many personal merits, if she became the king’s favorite wife and had significant influence on him. Solomon was proclaimed heir to the royal throne at her request.

1:7 Solomon reigned for forty years (1015-975 BC). A temple was built under him in Jerusalem. Rehoboam, or Rehoboam, the son of Solomon, reigned in Judah only “over the children of Israel who lived in the cities of Judah.” He assumed the reign of 41 years and reigned in Jerusalem for 17 years (975-957). After him, his son Abijah ascended the throne and reigned for three years (957-955). After Abijah, his son Asa reigned (955-914).

1:8 After Asa, Jehoshaphat, or Jehoshaphat his son, reigned for 35 years, and reigned for 25 years (914-889). After Jehoshaphat, Joram, or Jehoram, reigned for 32 years, and reigned for 8 years (891-884). After Joram, Matthew contains the omission of three kings: Ahaziah, Joash and Amaziah, who reigned in total from 884 to 810. If this omission was not made by chance, due to a copyist’s error, but intentionally, then the reason for the exclusion of the three named kings from the genealogy should be sought in the fact that the evangelist considered them unworthy to be counted 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 did wickedness and unrest ever reach such a development as in the time of Ahab, with whose house the kings Ahaziah, Joash and Amaziah had connections through Athaliah..

1:9 Jehoram's great-grandson Uzziah (810-758) is also called Azariah in the Bible. After Uzziah, Jotham, or Jotham, his son, reigned for 25 years, and reigned in Jerusalem for 16 years (758-742). After Jotham, his son Ahaz, 20 years old, ascended 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, 12 years old, ascended the throne and reigned for 50 years (698-643). After Manasseh, his son Ammon, or Amon, reigned (in the Gospel of Matthew, according to the most ancient manuscripts, Sinai and Vatican, etc., it should be read: Amos; but in other, less valuable, but numerous manuscripts: Amon), 22 years and reigned for two years (643-641).

1:11 Josiah took the throne for 8 years and reigned for 31 years (641-610).

After Josiah, his son Jehoahaz, the wicked king, reigned for only three months, whom “the people of the earth” reigned. But the king of Egypt deposed him. Since Joahaz was not one of the Savior’s ancestors, the evangelist does not mention him. Instead of Jehoahaz, his brother Eliakim, 25 years old, was enthroned and reigned in Jerusalem for 11 years (610-599). The Babylonian king, Nebuchadnezzar, subjugated Eliakim and changed his name to Joachim.

After him, his son Jehoiachin (or Joahin), 18 years old, reigned and reigned for only three months (in 599). During his reign, Nebuchadnezzar, the king of Babylon, approached Jerusalem, besieged the city, and Jehoiachin 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 installed Mattaniah, Jehoiachin's uncle, and changed Mattaniah's name to Zedekiah. Since the evangelist leads the further line from Jeconiah and after the resettlement to Babylon, there was no need to mention Zedekiah. After moving to Babylon, Jeconiah 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 friendly and set his throne higher than the throne of the kings that he had in Babylon. Jeconiah ended the period of the kings of Judah, which lasted more than 450 years.

As simple as verse 11 is, its interpretation presents insurmountable and almost insurmountable difficulties. In Greek, and precisely in the best manuscripts, it is not the same as in Russian: Josiah gave birth to Jehoiachin (and not Joachim)... during (during) the Babylonian resettlement, i.e. to Babylon. Further in verse 12 it is the same as in Russian. It is assumed that words (according to Russian translation) Josiah begat Joachim; Joachim gave birth to Jehoiachin(underlined) there is an insertion into the original words of Matthew, - admittedly, a very ancient one, already known to Irenaeus in the second century A.D., but still an insertion, originally made in the margins in order to agree the genealogy of Matthew with the Old Testament writings, and then - an answer to the pagans who reproached 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 17th century To explain this omission and restore the correct reading of verse 11, note the following. IN 1 Par 3:15,16,17 The sons of King Josiah are listed as follows: “the firstborn is Jehoahaz, the second is Joachim, the third is Zedekiah, the fourth is Shellum.” From this it is clear that Joachim had three brothers. Further: “the sons of Joachim: Jehoiachin his son, Zedekiah his son.” This shows that Jeconiah had only one brother. Finally: “the sons of Jeconiah: Assir, Shealtiel”, etc. Here the gospel genealogy almost coincides with the genealogy 1 Par 3:17. IN 2 Kings 24:17 Mattaniah or Zedekiah is called Jeconiah's uncle. Having carefully examined these testimonies, we see that Josiah had a son (second) Joachim; he had several brothers, about whom the evangelist does not speak; but speaks of Jehoiachin's brothers, while according to 1 Par 3:16 the latter had only one brother, Zedekiah, which disagrees with the testimony of the Evangelist Matthew. Therefore, it is assumed that there were two Jehoiachins, Jehoiachin the first, who was also called Joachim, and Jehoiachin the second. Jehoiachin the first was originally called Eliakim, then the king of Babylon changed his name to Joachim. The reason why he was called Jeconiah was explained in ancient times (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 consonant letters used in both names. Accepting this interpretation, we must 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 Shealtiel,” etc. It is objected to this interpretation that such a designation of childbirth is contrary to the customs observed in genealogy. If the above interpretation were correct, then the evangelist would have to express himself this way: “Josiah begat Jehoiachin the first, Jehoiachin the first begot Jehoiachin the second, Jehoiachin the second begat Shealtiel,” 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 commentators, to resolve this difficulty, suggest that the original reading of verse 11 was: “Josiah begat Jehoiakim and his brothers; Joachim gave birth to Jehoiachin during the Babylonian migration.” This latter interpretation is better. Although it, due to the rearrangement of the words “and his brothers,” does not agree with the existing Greek text of the Gospel of Matthew, confirmed by ancient and important manuscripts, it can be assumed that the rearrangement was made by mistake by the ancient scribes. In support of the latter interpretation, it can also be pointed out that the existing Greek text, i.e., as stated above, “Josiah begat Jeconiah and his brothers during the (Russian translation) 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 Jeremiah 22:30, where it is said about Joachim: “Thus says the Lord: write down a man, deprived of children, as an unfortunate man in his days,” then the words “deprived of children” are explained by subsequent expressions of the prophet, from which it is clear that the children of Joachim will not sit on the throne of David and "to rule over Judea." It is in this last sense that the expression “deprived of children” should be understood.

1:12 (Luke 3:27) Among the sons of Jeconiah in 1 Par 3:17 Salafiel is mentioned. But according to Art. 18 and 19 Jehoiachin also had a son, Pedaiah, and it was to him that Zerubbabel was born. Thus, in the Gospel of Matthew here again, apparently, there is an omission - Pedaiah. Meanwhile in many other places scripture and in Josephus Flavius ​​Zerubbabel is everywhere called the son of Shealtiel ( 1 Rides 3:2; Nehemiah 22:1; Agg 1:1,12; 2:2,23 ; Josephus Flavius. Jude ancient XI, 3, §1, etc.). To explain this difficulty, it is assumed that Fedaia, according to the law of life, took the wife of the deceased Salafiel for himself, and thus the children of Fedaia became, by law, the children of Salafiel, his brother.

1:13-15 By 1 Chronicles 3:19 et seq. Abihu is not among the sons and grandsons of Zerubbabel. Based on the similarity of Hebrew names. and Greek suggest that Abihu is identical with Godavihu v. 24th of the same chapter and Jude Luke 3:26. If so, then in the 13th verse of the Gospel of Matthew there is again an omission; namely the genealogy in the indicated place of the book. Chronicles is stated as follows: Zerubbabel, Hananiah, Isaiah, Shechaniah, Neariah, Elioenai, Godaviahu. Although the addition of six persons to such a gap would bring the genealogy of Matthew closer to the genealogy of Luke in terms of the number of genera, with a complete difference in names, the identification of Abihu with Godaviahu is very doubtful. However, some newer interpreters accept this explanation. Nothing is known about the persons after Zerubbabel and, perhaps, Abihu, mentioned in verses 13-15, neither from the Old Testament, nor from the writings of Josephus, nor from the Talmudic and other writings. One can only note that this contradicts the opinion according to which the evangelist compiled the genealogy of the Savior using 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 Jacob the father of Joseph, Luke Luke 3:23- Or me. And according to legend, the father and mother of Mary were Joachim and Anna. The Savior, according to the clear narrative of Matthew and Luke Luke 1:26; 2:5 , was not the son of Joseph. Why, in this case, did the evangelists need to compile and place in their Gospels the genealogy of Christ, which in fact did not relate to Him? Most interpreters explain this circumstance by the fact that Matthew traces his genealogy through the ancestors of Joseph, wanting to show that Jesus was not his own, but the legitimate Son of Joseph and, therefore, the heir to his rights and privileges as a descendant of David. Luke, if in his genealogy he also mentions Joseph, then in reality he sets out the genealogy of Mary. This opinion was first expressed by the church writer Julius Africanus (3rd century), an excerpt from whose work was placed in the Church. history Eusebius (I, 7), with changes repeated in the interpretation of the Gospel of Luke Ambrose of Milan, and was known to Irenaeus (Against Heresies III, 32).

1:17 The word “all” refers most closely to the generations counted by Matthew from Abraham to David. In 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 clans indicated by me in this 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. One might think that the evangelist, having counted fourteen clans from Abraham to David , as well as from Jehoiachin to Christ, wanted to show some roundness and correctness in the calculation of genera, which is 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 quite consistent with the customs and thinking of the Jews. Something similar occurs in Gen 5:3 et seq., 2:10 et seq., where from Adam to Noah and from Noah to Abraham up to 10 generations are counted. By genera we mean 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. Yesrom. Aram. Aminadab. Naasson. Salmon. Boaz. Ovid. Jesse. David. II. Solomon. Rehoboam. Aviya. Asa. Jehoshaphat. Joram. Uzziah. Jotham. Ahaz. Hezekiah. Manasseh. Amon (Amos). Josiah. Joachim. III. Jeconiah. Salafiel. Zerubbabel. Abihu. Eliakim. Azor. Zadok. 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 due to the lack of a suitable Russian word. In its own sense, it would be better to translate this: “the origin of Jesus Christ (from the Virgin Mary) was like this.” The wedding rites of the Jews were somewhat similar to ours, which occur with the blessing of the bride and groom. A betrothal agreement was drawn up or a solemn verbal promise was given in the presence of witnesses that such and such a person would marry such and such a bride. Upon betrothal, the bride was considered the betrothed wife of her groom. Their union could only be destroyed by a proper divorce. But between betrothal and marriage, as with us, sometimes whole months passed (see. Deuteronomy 20:7). Mary is a Greek word; in Aramaic - Mariam, and in Hebrew. - 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 came together, 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 was already living with him(Joseph) in the house." But the expression, “Do not be afraid to receive Mary your wife,” seems to show that Joseph and Mary did not live in the same house. Other commentators agree with Chrysostom.

It turned out that it became noticeable to strangers.

From the Holy Spirit. All the circumstances about which the evangelist speaks, which are of a miraculous nature, are incomprehensible to us (cf. Luke 3:22; Acts 1:16; Eph 4:30).

1:19 Her husband - the word husband, literally translated from the Greek, means literally husband, not betrothed. But it is clear that the evangelist uses this word in the sense of a protector, patron, and perhaps even betrothed. Otherwise there would be an obvious contradiction in his own narrative. In St. In Scripture, the words husband and wife are sometimes used not in the sense of spouses ( Gen 29:21; Deut 22:24).

Being righteous - Heb. tzaddik. This was the name given to pious people who always tried to fulfill the provisions of the law. Why Joseph is called this way is clear. Seeing that Mary was pregnant, he thought that she had done something bad, and since the law punished bad deeds, Joseph also intended to punish Mary, although this punishment, due to his kindness, should have been light. The word righteous, however, does not mean: kind or loving. In the Gospel one can clearly observe the struggle of feelings in Joseph’s soul: 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 glorify her, tell others about her and then, on the basis of his publicity or story, demand the punishment of Mary. The word righteous is not explained by the expression unwilling; this is the last - an additional and special participle (in the Greek participle). Joseph was a strict guardian of the law and, moreover, did not want to denounce Mary. The word announce in Greek is read differently: 1. According to one reading, announce (δειγματίσαι) should be explained as follows: set an example, expose for the sake of example. The word is rare, not used among the Greeks, but in the New Testament it is 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 publicize in order to bring something bad, to put to death as a woman who has not proven faithful ( παραδειγματίσαι ). Wanted - a different word is used here in Greek, and not without wanting - means a decision, a desire to put your intention into action. Greek word, translated by the word to let go, means to divorce. The divorce could be secret or open. The first was carried out 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 in court, Joseph intended to do the first. Secretly can also mean secret negotiations here, without a divorce letter. This, of course, was illegal Deuteronomy 24:1; but the divorce letter, 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. implies hesitation and doubt and even suffering, “ behold, the Angel of the Lord..." The word behold, in Russian, is used primarily in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke and gives special power to the speech that follows it. The reader or listener is invited to pay special attention here. Next, the evangelist tells how Joseph’s doubts and hesitations were eliminated. During the Annunciation, the Angel of the Lord appeared to the Virgin Mary in reality, because on her part a conscious attitude to the angel’s gospel and consent was required; The angel's gospel to Mary was related to 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 did not have the same meaning as the gospel to Mary; it was simply a warning.

Angel means messenger, messenger; but here, of course, it is not a simple messenger, but the Lord’s. As can be concluded from the Gospel of Luke, it was the angel Gabriel. He told Joseph in a dream (Joseph, son of David - in Greek nominative cases instead of surnames) not to be afraid to accept Mary his wife. Do not be afraid - here it means: do not hesitate to do anything. Receive - 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 an engaged woman; if she was not, then, in addition to this restoration, the word will also mean accepting her 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 it, i.e. a baby not yet born or born, but just conceived, and therefore neuter. From the time of the dream, Joseph was to become the guardian and patron of both the mother and the Baby.

1:21 To give birth to a son - the verb (τέξεται) is used the same 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 call - (so in Greek; in Slavic and some Russian editions: they will name) instead of nareki, name, future instead of command., is also used in our country 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), that is, the known people belonging to Him and not to anyone else. First of all, of course, here the Jewish people - this is how Joseph could understand these words; then people from every nation - however, from the Jewish and from other nations, only those people who are His followers, believe in Him, belong to Him. From their sins (Greek, his, that is, the people) - not from punishment for sins, but from the sins themselves - a very important remark, indicating the authenticity of Matthew's Gospel. At the very beginning of the gospel gospel, even when the subsequent activity of Christ was not clear and undefined, it is indicated that Jesus Christ will save His people from their sins, not from worldly submission to secular authority, but precisely from sins, crimes against the commandments of God. Here we have a clear indication of the nature of the future "spiritual activity of Christ."

1:22 It is not known whose words are stated in this verse, the angel or the evangelist. According to Chrysostom, " worthy of a miracle and worthy of himself, the angel exclaimed, saying", etc. That is, an angel, according to Chrysostom, " sends Joseph to Isaiah, so that, having awakened, even if he forgets his words, as if they were completely new, having been nourished by the Scriptures, he would remember the words of the prophets, and at the same time bring to memory his words" This opinion is also supported by some of the newest interpreters on the grounds that if these words were considered to belong to the evangelist, then the angel’s speech would seem unclear and unfinished.

1:23 The words quoted by the angel (or, in another opinion, the evangelist himself) are found in Isa 7:14. They are given with minor deviations from the LXX translation; They were spoken by Isaiah to the Jewish king Ahaz on the occasion of the invasion of Judea by the kings of Syria and Israel. The words of the prophet most closely pointed to contemporary circumstances. Used in the Hebrew original and Greek. translation the word virgin means literally a virgin who is about to give birth to a son naturally and from her husband (see. 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 occur with a complete change in his contemporary circumstances - instead of the invasion of the kings of Israel and Syria, the king of Assyria will subjugate Judea. He “will go through Judea, flood it and rise high - it will reach the neck; and the spread of her wings will be throughout the entire width of Your land, Immanuel!” ( Isaiah 8:8). If in the first prophecy one should understand an ordinary virgin, 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 clearly be 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 into Greek. According to some interpreters, "what means" serves as evidence that the Gospel of Matthew was originally written not in Hebrew, but in Greek. On the other hand, they said that when the Gospel was translated into Greek, the expression was already inserted at that time either by the translator or by the evangelist himself.

1:24 When Joseph awoke from sleep, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded (ordained, 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: dondezhe, 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 about the time before the birth of the Child, and does not speak or discuss the subsequent time. At all " what happened after birth is left to you to judge for yourself"(John Chrysostom). The word "firstborn" is not found in the most important and ancient manuscripts, Xing. and V. But in other manuscripts, less important, but numerous, this word was added. It occurs in Luke 2:7, where there are no discrepancies. It means both the first and the last, but not always. In some cases, the first son, followed by others. He called - this expression refers to Joseph. He named the Child according to the command of the angel and by virtue of his authority as a legal, although not natural, father (cf. Luke 1:62,63).

Gospel

The word “Gospel” (τὸ εὐαγγέλιον) in classical Greek was used to designate: a) a reward that is given to the messenger of joy (τῷ εὐαγγέλῳ), b) a sacrifice sacrificed on the occasion of receiving some good news or a holiday celebrated on the same occasion and c) this good news itself. In the New Testament this expression means:

a) the good news that Christ reconciled people with God and brought us the greatest benefits - mainly founded 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 narration of the most important events from the life of Christ ( 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 designate the very process of preaching Christian teaching ( Rome. 1:1).

Sometimes the word “Gospel” is accompanied by a designation and its content. There are, for example, phrases: Gospel of the kingdom ( Matt. 4:23), i.e. good news of the kingdom of God, the gospel of peace ( Eph. 6:15), i.e. about peace, the gospel of salvation ( Eph. 1:13), i.e. about salvation, etc. Sometimes the genitive case following the word "Gospel" means the author or source of the good news ( Rome. 1:1, 15:16 ; 2 Cor. 11:7; 1 Thess. 2:8) or the personality 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 did not leave any records of His speeches and deeds. In the same way, the 12 apostles were not born writers: they were “unlearned and simple people” ( Acts 4:13), although 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 most believers, oral stories about Christ were much more important than written ones. In this way, the apostles and preachers or evangelists “transmitted” (παραδιδόναι) the stories about the deeds and speeches of Christ, and the believers “received” (παραλαμβάνειν) - but, of course, not mechanically, only by memory, as can be said about the students of rabbinical schools, but with all my soul, as if something living and life-giving. But this period of oral tradition was soon to end. On the one hand, Christians should have felt the need for a written presentation of the Gospel in their disputes with the Jews, who, as we know, denied the reality of Christ’s miracles and even argued that Christ did not declare Himself the Messiah. It was necessary to show the Jews that Christians have genuine stories about Christ from those persons who were either among His apostles or who were in close communication with eyewitnesses of the deeds of Christ. 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 to the miracles of Christ were thinning. Therefore, it was necessary to secure in writing individual sayings of the Lord and His entire speeches, as well as the stories of the apostles about Him. It was then that separate records began to appear here and there of what was reported in the oral tradition about Christ. The words of Christ, which contained the rules of Christian life, were most carefully recorded, and they were much more free to convey various events from the life of Christ, preserving 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 recordings did not think about the completeness of the story. 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 speeches and deeds of Christ. This is evident, by the way, from the fact that they do not contain, for example, the following saying of Christ: “It is more blessed to give than to receive” ( Acts 20:35). The Evangelist Luke reports about such records, saying that many before him had already begun to compile narratives about the life of Christ, but that they lacked proper completeness and that therefore they did not provide sufficient “affirmation” in the faith ( OK. 1:1-4).

Our canonical Gospels apparently arose from the same motives. The period of their appearance can be determined to be approximately thirty years - from 60 to 90 (the last was the Gospel of John). The first three Gospels are usually called synoptic in biblical scholarship, because they depict the life of Christ in such a way that their three narratives can be viewed in one without much difficulty and combined into one coherent narrative (synoptics - from Greek - looking together). They began to be called Gospels individually, perhaps as early as the end of the 1st century, but from church writing we have information that such a name began to be given to the entire composition of the Gospels only in the second half of the 2nd century. As for the names: “Gospel of Matthew”, “Gospel of Mark”, etc., then more correctly these very ancient names from Greek should be translated as follows: “Gospel according to Matthew”, “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, another to Mark, etc.

Four Gospels

Thus, the ancient Church looked upon the portrayal of the life of Christ in our four Gospels, not as different Gospels or narratives, but as one Gospel, one book in four types. That is why in the Church the name Four Gospels was established for our Gospels. Saint Irenaeus called them the “fourfold Gospel” (τετράμορφον τὸ εὐαγγέλιον - see Irenaeus Lugdunensis, Adversus haereses liber 3, ed. A. Rousseau and L. Doutreleaü Irenée Lyon. Contre les h érésies, livre 3, vol 2. Paris, 1974, 11, 11).

The Fathers of the Church dwell on the question: why exactly did the Church accept not one Gospel, but four? So St. John Chrysostom says: “Couldn’t one evangelist write everything that was needed. Of course, he could, but when four people wrote, they wrote not at the same time, not in the same place, without communicating or conspiring with each other, and for all that they wrote in such a way that everything seemed to be uttered by one mouth, then this is the strongest proof of the truth. You will say: “What happened, however, was the opposite, for the four Gospels are often found to be in disagreement.” This very thing is a sure sign of truth. For if the Gospels had exactly agreed with each other in everything, even regarding the words themselves, then none of the enemies would have believed that the Gospels were not written according to ordinary mutual agreement. Now the slight disagreement between them frees them from all suspicion. For what they say differently regarding time or place does not in the least harm the truth of their narrative. In the main thing, which forms the basis of our life and the essence of preaching, not one of them disagrees with the other in anything or anywhere - that God became a man, worked miracles, was crucified, resurrected, and ascended into heaven.” (“Conversations on the Gospel of Matthew”, 1).

Saint Irenaeus also finds a special symbolic meaning in the fourfold number of our Gospels. “Since there are four countries of the world in which we live, and since the Church is scattered throughout the entire earth and has its confirmation in the Gospel, it was necessary for it to have four pillars, spreading incorruptibility from everywhere and reviving the human race. The All-Ordering Word, seated on the Cherubim, gave us the Gospel in four forms, but permeated with one spirit. For David, praying for His appearance, says: “He who sits on the Cherubim, show 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 a 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). Among the other Fathers of the Church, the symbols of the lion and the calf were moved and the first was given to Mark, and the second to John. Since the 5th century. in this form, the symbols of the evangelists began to be added to the images of the four evangelists in church painting.

Mutual relationship 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 mentioned above, have extremely much in common with each other, and this similarity involuntarily catches the eye even when reading them briefly. Let us first of all talk about the similarity of the Synoptic Gospels and the reasons for this phenomenon.

Even Eusebius of Caesarea, in his “canons,” divided the Gospel of Matthew into 355 parts and noted that 111 of them were found in all three weather forecasters. IN modern times exegetes 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 back to 350. In Matthew, then, 350 verses are unique to him, in Mark there are 68 such verses, in Luke - 541. The similarities are mainly noticed in the rendering of the sayings of Christ, and the differences are in the narrative part. When Matthew and Luke literally agree with each other 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. P. 173). It is also remarkable that some passages in all three evangelists follow the same sequence, for example, the temptation and the speech in Galilee, the calling of Matthew and the conversation about fasting, the plucking of ears of corn and the healing of the withered man, the calming of the storm and the healing of the Gadarene demoniac, etc. The similarity sometimes even extends to the construction of sentences and expressions (for example, in the presentation of a prophecy Small 3:1).

As for the differences observed among weather forecasters, there are quite a lot of them. Some things are reported by only two evangelists, others even by one. Thus, only Matthew and Luke cite the conversation on the mount of the Lord Jesus Christ and report the story of the birth and first years of Christ’s life. Luke alone speaks of the birth of John the Baptist. Some 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 are the expressions.

This phenomenon of similarities and differences in the Synoptic Gospels has long attracted the attention of interpreters of Scripture, and various assumptions have long been made to explain this fact. It seems more correct to believe 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 different places in a more or less extensive form, what was considered necessary to offer to those entering the Church. Thus, a well-known specific type was formed oral gospel, and this is the type we have in 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, characteristic only of his work. At the same time, we cannot exclude the assumption that an older Gospel could have been known to the evangelist who wrote later. Moreover, the difference between the weather forecasters 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 differ in very many ways from the Gospel of John the Theologian. So they depict almost exclusively the activity of Christ in Galilee, and the Apostle John depicts mainly the sojourn of Christ in Judea. In terms of content, the Synoptic Gospels also differ significantly 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 entire people. John, on the contrary, omits a lot from 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 the attention of their readers to the Kingdom founded by Him, 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 portrays as the Only Begotten Son of God and as the Light for all mankind. That is why the ancient interpreters called the Gospel of John primarily spiritual (πνευματικόν), in contrast to the synoptic ones, as depicting primarily the human side in the person of Christ (εὐαγγέλιον σωματικόν), i.e. The gospel is physical.

However, it must be said that the weather forecasters also have passages that indicate that the weather forecasters knew the activity of Christ in Judea ( Matt. 23:37, 27:57 ; OK. 10:38-42), and John also has indications of the continued activity of Christ in Galilee. In the same way, weather forecasters convey such sayings of Christ that 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 weather forecasters and John in their depiction of the face and work of Christ.

The Reliability of the Gospels

Although criticism has long been expressed against the reliability of the Gospels, and recently these attacks of criticism have especially intensified (the theory of myths, especially the theory of Drews, who does not recognize the existence of Christ at all), however, all the objections of criticism are so insignificant that they are broken 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 talk about the most important general reasons for which we recognize the Gospels as completely reliable documents. This is, firstly, the existence of a tradition of eyewitnesses, many of whom lived to the era when our Gospels appeared. Why on earth would we refuse to trust these sources of our Gospels? Could they have made up everything in our Gospels? No, all the Gospels are purely historical. Secondly, it is not clear why the Christian consciousness would want - as the mythical theory claims - to crown the head of a simple Rabbi Jesus with the crown of the Messiah and Son of God? Why, for example, is it not said about the Baptist that he performed miracles? Obviously because he didn't create them. And from here it follows that if Christ is said to be the Great Wonderworker, then it means that He really was like that. And why could one deny the authenticity of Christ’s miracles, since the highest miracle - His Resurrection - is witnessed like no other event in ancient history (see. 1 Cor. 15)?

Bibliography of foreign works on the Four Gospels

Bengel - 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. Gottingen, 1911.

Westcott - The New Testament in Original Greek the text rev. by Brooke Foss Westcott. New York, 1882.

B. Weiss - Weiss B. Die Evangelien des Markus und Lukas. Gottingen, 1901.

Yog. Weiss (1907) - Die Schriften des Neuen Testaments, von Otto Baumgarten; Wilhelm Bousset. Hrsg. von Johannes Weis_s, Bd. 1: Die drei älteren Evangelien. Die Apostelgeschichte, Matthaeus Apostolus; Marcus Evangelista; Lucas Evangelista. . 2. Aufl. Gottingen, 1907.

Godet - Godet F. Commentar zu dem Evangelium des Johannes. Hanover, 1903.

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 - Klostermann A. Das Markusevangelium nach seinem Quellenwerthe für die evangelische Geschichte. Gottingen, 1867.

Cornelius a Lapide - Cornelius a Lapide. In SS Matthaeum et Marcum / Commentaria in scripturam sacram, t. 15. Parisiis, 1857.

Lagrange - Lagrange M.-J. Etudes bibliques: Evangile selon St. Marc. Paris, 1911.

Lange - Lange J.P. Das Evangelium nach Matthäus. Bielefeld, 1861.

Loisy (1903) - Loisy A.F. Le quatrième èvangile. Paris, 1903.

Loisy (1907-1908) - Loisy A.F. Les èvangiles synoptiques, 1-2. : Ceffonds, près Montier-en-Der, 1907-1908.

Luthardt - 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. Gottingen, 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. Gottingen, 1902.

Merx (1902) - Merx A. Erläuterung: Matthaeus / Die vier kanonischen Evangelien nach ihrem ältesten bekannten Texte, Teil 2, Hälfte 1. Berlin, 1902.

Merx (1905) - Merx A. Erläuterung: Markus und Lukas / Die vier kanonischen Evangelien nach ihrem ältesten bekannten Texte. Teil 2, Hälfte 2. Berlin, 1905.

Morison - Morison J. A practical commentary on the Gospel according to St. Matthew. London, 1902.

Stanton - Stanton V.H. The Synoptic Gospels / The Gospels as historical documents, Part 2. Cambridge, 1903. Tholuck (1856) - Tholuck A. Die Bergpredigt. Gotha, 1856.

Tholuck (1857) - Tholuck A. Commentar zum Evangelium Johannis. Gotha, 1857.

Heitmüller - see Yog. 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 für 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 N. The Greek Testament in four volumes, vol. 1. London, 1863.