Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Matthew 2:23

And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene.

23. a city called Nazareth ] St Matthew gives no intimation of any previous residence of Mary and Joseph at Nazareth.

Nazareth ] Said to signify “the Protectress” (Hebr. natsar), a small town of central Galilee, on the edge of the plain of Esdraelon, beautifully situated on the side of a steep hill within a sheltered valley.

He shall be called a Nazarene ] The meaning of this passage was probably as clear to the contemporaries of St Matthew, as the other references to prophecy Mat 2:15 ; Mat 2:17; for us it is involved in doubt. First, it may be said Nazarene cannot = Nazarite: the word differs in form, and in no sense could Christ be called a Nazarite. Secondly, the quotation is probably not from a lost prophecy. One meaning of the word Nazorus is an inhabitant of Nazareth, but the word either (1) recalls the Hebrew word netser a Branch, a title by which the Messiah is designated Isa 11:1, or (2) connects itself in thought with the Hebr. natsar, to save or protect (see above), and so has reference to the name and work of Jesus, or (3) is a synonym for “contemptible” or “lowly,” from the despised position of Nazareth. Of these (3) is perhaps the least probable explanation. The play upon words which (1) and (2) involve is quite characteristic of Hebrew phraseology. The sound of the original would be either (1) He whom the prophet called the “Netser” dwells at “Netser” (for this form of Nazareth see Smith’s Bib. Dict.), or (2) He who is called “Notsri” (my protector) dwells at “Natsaret” (the protectress).

In any case the passage gains fresh interest from the fact that the early Christians were called Nazarenes in scorn. Cp. Act 24:5. For them it would be a point of triumph that their enemies thus unconsciously connected them with a prophetic title of their Master.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

And he came and dwelt – That is, he made it his permanent residence. The Lord Jesus, in fact, resided there until he entered on the work of his ministry until he was about 30 years of age.

In a city called Nazareth – This was a small town, situated in Galilee, west of Capernaum, and not far from Cana. It was built partly in a valley and partly on the declivity of a hill, Luk 4:29. A hill is yet pointed out, to the south of Nazareth, as the one from which the people of the place attempted to precipitate the Saviour. It was a place, at that time, proverbial for wickedness, Joh 4:46. It is now (circa 1880s) a large village, with a convent and two churches. One of the churches, called the Church of the Annunciation, is the finest in the Holy Land, except that of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem.

A modern traveler describes Nazareth as situated upon the declivity of a hill, the vale which spreads out before it resembling a circular basin encompassed by mountains. Fifteen mountains appear to meet to form an inclosure for this beautiful spot, around which they rise like the edge of a shell, to guard it against intrusion. It is a rich and beautiful field, in the midst of barren mountains.

Another traveler (circa 1880s) speaks of the streets as narrow and steep. The houses, which are flat-roofed, are about 250 in number, and the inhabitants he estimates at 2,000. The population of the place is variously stated. though the average estimate is 3,000, of whom about 500 are Turks, and the rest are nominal Christians.

As all testimony to the truth and fidelity of the sacred narrative is important, I will here introduce a passage from the journal of Mr. Jowett, an intelligent modern traveler, especially as it is so full an illustration of the passage of Luke already cited.

Nazareth is situated on the side, and extends nearly to the foot, of a hill, which, though not very high, is rather steep and overhanging. The eye naturally wanders over its summit in quest of some point from which it might probably be that the people of this place endeavored to cast our Saviour down Luk 4:29, but in vain; no rock adapted to such an object appears here. At the foot of the hill is a modest, simple plain, surrounded by low hills, reaching in length nearly a mile; in breadth, near the city, 150 yards; but farther south, about 400 yards. On this plain there are a few olive and fig trees, sufficient, or rather scarcely sufficient, to make the spot picturesque. Then follows a ravine, which gradually grows deeper and narrower toward the south; until, after walking about another mile, you find yourself in an immense chasm, with steep rocks on either side, from whence you behold, as it were beneath your feet and before you, the noble plain of Esdraelon. Nothing can be finer than the apparently immeasurable prospect of this plain, bounded on the south by the mountains of Samaria. The elevation of the hills on which the spectator stands in this ravine is very great; and the whole scene, when we saw it. was clothed in the most rich mountain-blue color that can be conceived.

At this spot, on the right hand of the ravine, is shown the rock to which the men of Nazareth are supposed to have conducted our Lord for the purpose of throwing him down. With the New Testament in our hands we endeavored to examine the probabilities of the spot; and I confess there is nothing in it which excites a scruple of incredulity in my mind. The rock here is perpendicular for about 50 feet, down which space it would be easy to hurl a person who should be unawares brought to the summit, and his perishing would be a very certain consequence. That the spot might be at a considerable distance from the city is an idea not inconsistent with Lukes account; for the expression. thrusting Jesus out of the city, and leading him to the brow of the hill on which their city was built, gives fair scope for imagining that in their rage and debate the Nazarenes might, without originally intending his murder, press upon him for a considerable distance after they had left the synagogue. The distance, as already noticed, from modern Nazareth to the spot is scarcely two miles; a space which, in the fury of persecution, might soon be passed over. Or, should this appear too considerable, it is by no means certain but that Nazareth may at that time have extended through the principal part of the plain, which I have described as lying before the modern town. In this case, the distance passed over might not exceed a mile. I can see, therefore, no reason for thinking otherwise than that this may be the real scene where our divine prophet Jesus received so great a dishonor from the people of his own country and of his own kindred.

Mr. Fisk, an American missionary, was at Nazareth in the autumn of 1823. His description corresponds generally with that of Mr. Jowett. He estimates the population to be from 3,000 to 5,000, namely, Greeks, 300 to 400 families; Turks, 200 families; Catholics, 100 families; Greek Catholics, 40 to 50 familis; Maronites, 20 to 30 families; say, in all, 700 families.

That it might be fulfilled which was spoken … – The words here are not found in any of the books of the Old Testament, and there has been much difficulty in ascertaining the meaning of this passage. Some have supposed that Matthew meant to refer to Jdg 13:5, to Samson as a type of Christ; others that he refers to Isa 11:1, where the descendant of Jesse is called a Branch; in the Hebrew Netzer. Some have supposed that he refers to some prophecy which was not recorded, but handed down by tradition. But these suppositions are not satisfactory. It is much more probable that Matthew refers not to any particular place, but to the leading characteristics of the prophecies respecting him. The following remarks may make this clear:

1. He does not say by the prophet, as in Mat 1:22; Mat 2:5, Mat 2:15, but by the prophets, meaning no one particularly, but the general character of the prophecies.

2. The leading and most prominent prophecies respecting him were, that he was to be of humble life; to be despised and rejected. See Isa 53:2-3, Isa 53:7-9, Isa 53:12; Ps. 22.

3. The phrase he shall be called means the same as he shall be.

4. The character of the people of Nazareth was such that they were proverbially despised and contemned, Joh 1:46; Joh 7:52. To come from Nazareth, therefore, or to be a Nazarene, was the same as to be despised, or to be esteemed of low birth; to be a root out of dry ground, having no form or comeliness. This was what had been predicted by all the prophets. When Matthew says, therefore, that the prophecies were fulfilled, his meaning is, that the predictions of the prophets that he would be of a low and despised condition, and would be rejected, were fully accomplished in his being an inhabitant of Nazareth, and despised as such.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Verse 23. That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets] It is difficult to ascertain by what prophets this was spoken. The margin usually refers to Jdg 13:5, where the angel, foretelling the birth of Samson, says, No razor shall come upon his head; for the child shall be a NAZARITE ( nezir) unto God from the womb. The second passage usually referred to is Isa 11:1: There shall come forth a rod from the stem of Jesse, and a BRANCH ( netser) shall grow out of his roots. That this refers to Christ, there is no doubt. Jeremiah, Jer 23:5, is supposed to speak in the same language – I will raise unto David a righteous BRANCH: but here the word is tsemach, not netser; and it is the same in the parallel place, Zec 3:8; Zec 6:12; therefore, these two prophets cannot be referred to; but the passages in Judges and Isaiah may have been in the eye of the evangelist, as well as the whole institution relative to the Nazarite ( nezir) delivered at large, Num. 6:, where see the notes. As the Nazarite was the most pure and perfect institution under the law, it is possible that God intended to point out by it, not only the perfection of our Lord, but also the purity of his followers. And it is likely that, before St. Matthew wrote this Gospel, those afterwards called Christians bore the appellation of Nazarites, or Nazoreans, for so the Greek word, , should be written. Leaving the spiritual reference out of the question, the Nazarene or Nazorean here may mean simply an inhabitant or person of Nazareth; as Galilean does a person or inhabitant of Galilee. The evangelist evidently designed to state, that neither the sojourning at Nazareth, nor our Lord being called a Nazarene, were fortuitous events, but were wisely determined and provided for in the providence of God; and therefore foretold by inspired men, or fore-represented by significant institutions.

But how shall we account for the manner in which St. Matthew and others apply this, and various other circumstances, to the fulfilment of ancient traditions? This question has greatly agitated divines and critics for more than a century. Surenhusius, Hebrew professor at Amsterdam, and editor of a very splendid and useful edition of the Mishna, in six vols. fol. published an express treatise on this subject, in 1713, full of deep research and sound criticism. He remarks great difference in the mode of quoting used in the Sacred Writings: as, It hath been said – it is written – that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets – the Scripture says–see what is said – the Scripture foreseeing – he saith – is it not written? – the saying that is written, c., c. With great pains and industry, he has collected ten rules out of the Talmud and the rabbins, to explain and justify all the quotations made from the Old Testament in the New.

RULE I. Reading the words, not according to the regular vowel points, but to others substituted for them. He thinks this is done by Peter, Ac 3:22-23 by Stephen, Ac 7:42, c. and by Paul, 1Co 15:54; 2Co 8:15.

RULE II. Changing the letters, as done by St. Paul, Ro 9:33; 1Co 9:9, c. He 8:9., c. He 10:5.

RULE III. Changing both letters and vowel points, as he supposes is done by St. Paul, Ac 13:40-41; 2Co 8:15.

RULE IV. Adding some letters, and retrenching others.

RULE V. Transposing words and letters.

RULE VI. Dividing one word into two.

RULE VII. Adding other words to make the sense more clear.

RULE VIII. Changing the original order of the words.

RULE IX. Changing the original order, and adding other words.

RULE X. Changing the original order, and adding and retrenching words, which he maintains is a method often used by St. Paul.

Let it be observed, that although all these rules are used by the rabbins, yet, as far as they are employed by the sacred writers of the New Testament, they never, in any case, contradict what they quote from the Old, which cannot be said of the rabbins: they only explain what they quote, or accommodate the passage to the facts then in question. And who will venture to say that the Holy Spirit has not a right, in any subsequent period, to explain and illustrate his own meaning, by showing that it had a greater extension in the Divine mind than could have been then perceived by men? And has HE not a right to add to what he has formerly said, if it seem right in his own sight? Is not the whole of the New Testament, an addition to the Old, as the apostolic epistles are to the narrative of our Lord’s life and acts, as given by the evangelists?

Gusset, Wolf, Rosenmuller, and others, give four rules, according to which, the phrase, that it might be fulfilled, may be applied in the New Testament.

RULE I. When the thing predicted is literally accomplished.

RULE II. When that is done, of which the Scripture has spoken, not in a literal sense, but in a spiritual sense.

RULE III. When a thing is done neither in a literal nor spiritual sense, according to the fact referred to in the Scripture; but is similar to that fact.

RULE IV. When that which has been mentioned in the Old Testament as formerly done, is accomplished in a larger and more extensive sense in the New Testament.

St. Matthew seems to quote according to all these rules; and it will be useful to the reader to keep them constantly in view. I may add here, that the writers of the New Testament seem often to differ from those of the Old, because they appear uniformly to quote from some copy of the Septuagint version; and most of their quotations agree verbally, and often even literally, with one or other of the copies of that version which subsist to the present day. Want of attention to the difference of copies, in the Septuagint version, has led some divines and critics into strange and even ridiculous mistakes, as they have taken that for THE SEPTUAGINT which existed in the printed copy before them; which sometimes happened not to be the most correct.

ON the birth-place of our Lord, a pious and sensible man has made the following observations: –

“At the first sight, it seems of little consequence to know the place of Christ’s nativity; for we should consider him as our Redeemer, whatever the circumstances might be which attended his mortal life. But, seeing it has pleased God to announce, beforehand, the place where the Saviour of the world should be born, it became necessary that it should happen precisely in that place; and that this should be one of the characteristics whereby Jesus Christ should be known to be the true Messiah.

“It is also a matter of small importance to us where we may live, provided we find genuine happiness. There is no place on earth, however poor and despicable, but may have better and more happy inhabitants than many of those are who dwell in the largest and most celebrated cities. Do we know a single place on the whole globe where the works of God do not appear under a thousand different forms, and where a person may not feel that blessed satisfaction which arises from a holy and Christian life? For an individual, that place is preferable to all others where he can get and do most good. For a number of people, that place is best where they can find the greatest number of wise and pious men. Every nation declines, in proportion as virtue and religion lose their influence on the minds of the inhabitants. The place where a young man first beheld the dawn and the beauty of renewed nature, and with most lively sensations of joy and gratitude adored his God, with all the veneration and love his heart was capable of; the place where a virtuous couple first met, and got acquainted; or where two friends gave each other the noblest proofs of their most tender affection; the village where one may have given, or seen, the most remarkable example of goodness, uprightness, and patience; such places, I say, must be dear to their hearts.

“Bethlehem was, according to this rule, notwithstanding its smallness, a most venerable place; seeing that there so many pious people had their abode, and that acts of peculiar piety had often been performed in it. First, the patriarch Jacob stopped some time in it, to erect a monument to his well-beloved Rachel. It was at Bethlehem that honest Naomi, and her modest daughter-in-law, Ruth, gave such proofs of their faith and holiness; and in it Boaz, the generous benefactor, had his abode and his possessions.

At Bethlehem the humble Jesse sojourned, the happy father of so many sons; the youngest of whom rose from the pastoral life to the throne of Israel. It was in this country that David formed the resolution of building a house for the Lord, and in which he showed himself the true shepherd and father of his subjects, when, at the sight of the destroying angel, whose sword spread consternation and death on all hands, he made intercession for his people. It was in Bethlehem that Zerubbabel the prince was born, this descendant of David, who was the type of that Ruler and Shepherd under whose empire Israel is one day to assemble, in order to enjoy uninterrupted happiness. Lastly, in this city the Son of God appeared; who, by his birth, laid the foundation of that salvation, which, as Redeemer, he was to purchase by his death for the whole world. Thus, in places which from their smallness are entitled to little notice, men sometimes spring, who become the benefactors of the human race. Often, an inconsiderable village has given birth to a man, who, by his wisdom, uprightness, and heroism, has been a blessing to whole kingdoms.”

Sturm’s Reflections, translated by A. C. vol. iv.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

It appeareth by Luk 2:4, that Joseph dwelt in Nazareth before our Saviour was born; and, Luk 2:39, after Marys purification it is said, they returned into Galilee, to their own city Nazareth; and, Luk 4:16, he was there brought up. Hence, Joh 1:45, he is called by Philip, Jesus of Nazareth. But the following words of this verse afford as great difficulties as any other in holy writ.

1. How Christ could be called a Nazarene, who apparently was born at Bethlehem.

2. How the evangelist saith that was fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet,

He shall be called a Nazarene; whereas there is no such saying in all the prophets.

There is a strange variety of opinions as to these questions. Spanhemius acquiesceth in that which seemeth least liable to exception, viz. That Christ was to put a period to that order of Nazarites amongst the Jews, whose rules we have Num 6:2,3; of which order Samson was, as appears by Jdg 13:7, and Joseph was called Gen 49:26, the very same word which is used Jdg 13:7. Both Joseph and Samson were eminent types of Christ. And it was spoken of Christ by the prophets, (the holy men of God who wrote the Scriptures), that Christ should be called Nezir, as it is in the Hebrew, in that it was spoken of those that were his types; who are both expressly so called. The word signifieth a holy person, one separated to God, and from ordinary converse with men. Christ was to be such a Nazarite, separated to God, for the accomplishment of our redemption, and, like Joseph, separated from his brethren: Isa 53:3, he was rejected of men:we hid as it were our faces from him, and we esteemed him not. God by his singular providence so ordered it, that he who was the antitype to all the Nazarites, and the true Nezir, or person separated, should be educated at Nazareth, a poor contemptible town: Joh 1:46, Nathanael said, Can there any good come out of Nazareth? That while his education there gave the Jews an occasion to reproach him, as a Nazarene, because born at Nazareth, believers amongst the Jews might understand him to be the true Nazarite, understood in Joseph and Samson called by this name, as types and figures of him who was to come, separated by God to a more excellent end, and from men in a more eminent manner. So that what the prophets spake of this nature concerning Christ, they spake of those who were the true types of Christ. Those who will read Spanhemius, and Poli Critica, will find large discourses about the difficulties of this text, but this seemeth to be Spanhemiuss opinion, improving the notion of Mr. Calvin.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

23. And he came and dwelt in a citycalled Nazaretha small town in Lower Galilee, lying in theterritory of the tribe of Zebulun, and about equally distant from theMediterranean Sea on the west and the Sea of Galilee on the east.NoteIf, from Lu 2:39, onewould conclude that the parents of Jesus brought Him straight back toNazareth after His presentation in the templeas if there had beenno visit of the Magi, no flight to Egypt, no stay there, and nopurpose on returning to settle again at Bethlehemone might, fromour Evangelist’s way of speaking here, equally conclude that theparents of our Lord had never been at Nazareth until now. Did we knowexactly the sources from which the matter of each of the Gospels wasdrawn up, or the mode in which these were used, this apparentdiscrepancy would probably disappear at once. In neither case isthere any inaccuracy. At the same time it is difficult, with thesefacts before us, to conceive that either of these two Evangelistswrote his Gospel with that of the other before himthough manythink this a precarious inference.

that it might be fulfilledwhich was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called aNazarenebetter, perhaps, “Nazarene.” The bestexplanation of the origin of this name appears to be that whichtraces it to the word netzer in Isa11:1 the small twig, sprout, or sucker, whichthe prophet there says, “shall come forth from the stem (orrather, ‘stump’) of Jesse, the branch which should fructify from hisroots.” The little town of Nazareth, mentioned neither in theOld Testament nor in JOSEPHUS,was probably so called from its insignificance: a weak twig incontrast to a stately tree; and a special contempt seemed to restupon it”Can any good thing come out of Nazareth?” (Joh1:46) over and above the general contempt in which all Galileewas held, from the number of Gentiles that settled in the upperterritories of it, and, in the estimation of the Jews, debased it.Thus, in the providential arrangement by which our Lord was broughtup at the insignificant and opprobrious town called Nazareth,there was involved, first, a local humiliation; next, an allusion toIsaiah’s prediction of His lowly, twig-like upspringing from thebranchless, dried-up stump of Jesse; and yet further, a standingmemorial of that humiliation which “the prophets,” in anumber of the most striking predictions, had attached to the Messiah.

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth,…. Which was a city of Galilee, and where Joseph and Mary had both dwelt before, Lu 1:26 here they came and fixed their habitation,

that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet. This affair of going into Galilee, and settling at Nazareth, was brought about with this view, to accomplish what had been foretold by the prophets, or prophet, the plural number being used for the singular, as in Joh 6:45. And indeed it is so rendered here in the Syriac, Persic, and Ethiopic versions; and designs the prophet Isaiah, and respects that prophecy of his in Isa 11:1 “and there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and , “a branch shall grow out of his roots”; a prophecy owned by the Jews e themselves to belong to the Messiah, and which was now fulfilled in Jesus; who as he was descended from Jesse’s family, so by dwelling at Nazareth, he would appear to be, and would be “called a Nazarene, or Netzer, the branch”; being an inhabitant of Natzareth, or Netzer, so called from the multitude of plants and trees that grew there.

A Nazarene, as David de Pomis says f,

“is one that is born in the city Netzer, which is said to be in the land of Galilee, three days journey distant from Jerusalem.”

Now though Christ was not born, yet because he dwelt at Nazareth, and was educated there; hence the Jews frequently call him , “Jesus, the Nazarene g”; and sometimes only , “the Nazarene” h. They also design him by , “Ben Netzer” i, of whom they say a great many evil things: and that Christ is often called Jesus of Nazareth, or the Nazarene, and his followers Nazarenes, from the place of his habitation, is known to everyone. One of Christ’s disciples is called Netzer in the Talmud k, and made to plead for his life, because his name signified a branch, according to Isa 11:1. Surenhusius observes l, that the form “to fulfil what is said”, used by the Talmudists, and which he takes to be the same with this here, is used by them, when they allege not the very words of Moses, or the prophets, but their sense, which is deduced as a certain axiom from them; and thinks it is applicable to the present case.

e Targum, Jarchi, Aben Ezra & Kimchi in loc. f Lexic Heb. fol. 141. 2. g T. Bab. Avoda Zara, fol. 17. 1. Ganz. par. 2. fol. 14. 2. Abarbinel in Dan. fol. 44. 1. h Ganz. par. 1. fol. 24. 2. i T. Bab. Cetuboth, fol. 51. 2. & Gloss. in ib. Bereshith Rabba, fol. 67. 2. Abarbinel in Dau. fol. 44. 1. k T. Bab. Sanhedrim, fol. 43. 1. l Biblos Katallages, p, 2, 3, 4, 197, &c.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

Should be called a Nazarene ( ). Matthew says “that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets” ( ). It is the plural and no single prophecy exists which says that the Messiah was to be called a Nazarene. It may be that this term of contempt (John 1:46; John 7:52) is what is meant, and that several prophecies are to be combined like Matt 22:6; Matt 22:8; Matt 69:11; Matt 69:19; Isa 53:2; Isa 53:3; Isa 53:4. The name Nazareth means a shoot or branch, but it is by no means certain that Matthew has this in mind. It is best to confess that we do not know. See Broadus on Matthew for the various theories. But, despised as Nazareth was at that time, Jesus has exalted its fame. The lowly Nazarene he was at first, but it is our glory to be the followers of the Nazarene. Bruce says that “in this case, therefore, we certainly know that the historic fact suggested the prophetic reference, instead of the prophecy creating the history.” The parallels drawn by Matthew between the history of Israel and the birth and infancy of Jesus are not mere fancy. History repeats itself and writers of history find frequent parallels. Surely Matthew is not beyond the bounds of reason or of fact in illustrating in his own way the birth and infancy of Jesus by the Providence of God in the history of Israel.

Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament

The prophets. Note the plural, as indicating not any one prediction in particular, but a summary of the import of several prophetic statements, such as Psa 22:6, 8; Psa 69:11, 19; Isa 53:2, 3, 4.

A Nazarene. A term of contempt (compare Joh 1:46, and Joh 7:52). The very name of Nazareth suggested insignificance. In Hebrew it meant sprout or shoot. The name is prophetically given to the Messiah (Isa 11:1). In Isa 10:33, 34, the fate of Assyria is described under the figure of the felling of a cedar – forest. The figure of the tree is continued at the opening of ch. 11 concerning the Jewish state. The cedar throws out no fresh suckers, but the oak is a tree “in which, after the felling, a stock remaineth” (Isa 6:13; compare Job 14:9). There is a future then for Israel, represented by the oak. “There shall come forth a shoot from the stock of Jesse, and a twig from his roots shall bear fruit.” As David sprang from the humble family of Jesse, so the Messiah, the second David, shall arise out of great humiliation. The fact that Jesus grew up at Nazareth was sufficient reason for his being despised. He was not a lofty branch on the summit of a stately tree; not a recognized and honored son of the royal house of David, now fallen, but an insignificant sprout from the roots of Jesse; a Nazarene, of an upstart sprout – town.

Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament

1) “And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth:” (kai elthon katokesen eis polin legomenen Nazareth) And when he had come into Galilee, he dwelt in a city that is called Nazareth,” some 15 miles west of Tiberius and the Sea of Galilee, in Lower Galilee, lying in the territory of Zebulon. To the east was the blue sea of Galilee, to the north Mt. Hermon, to the far west the Valley of Migiddo, the Mt. Carmel range, and the Mediterranean Sea.

2) “That it might be fulfilled,” (hopos plerothe to herthen dia ton propheton) “So came to be fulfilled thereby the thing that had been spoken (aforetold) through the prophet;” For all the prophets had given witness of Him as the coming Redeemer, and as the “spirit of prophecy,” *Act 10:43; Rev 19:10.

3) “Which was spoken by the prophets,” (te hrethen dia ton propheton) “The thing (matter) that had been rhetorically told through the prophet,” apparently referring to Isa 11:1 where He is referred to as “Netzer” or rod out of the stem or family tree of Jesse, father of David. Though no single prophecy may be here referred to the tenor of prophecy evidences that he was to be “despised or taken lightly of men,” Isa 53:3; Joh 1:45-46.

4) “He shall be called a Nazarene.” (hoti Nazoraios klethesetai) “That he (Jesus) shall be called a Nazarene,” a despised one, Joh 1:11-12; Joh 3:19-20; Mat 27:30-31. He was identified throughout His life by the world as the despised Jesus of Nazareth.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

23. He shall be called a Nazarene Matthew does not derive Nazarene from Nazareth, as if this were its strict and proper etymology, but only makes an allusion. The word נזיר, or Nazarite, signifies holy and devoted to God, and is derived from נזר, to separate. The noun נזר, indeed, signifies a flower: (221) but Matthew refers, beyond all doubt, to the former meaning. For we nowhere read that Nazarites meant blooming or flourishing, but persons who were consecrated to God, according to the directions given by the Law, (Num 6:1) The meaning is: though it was by fear that Joseph was driven into a corner of Galilee, yet God had a higher design, and appointed the city of Nazareth as the place of Christ’s residence, that he might justly be called a Nazarite But it is asked, who are the prophets that gave this name to Christ? for there is no passage to be found that answers to the quotation. Some think it a sufficient answer, that Scripture frequently calls him Holy: but that is a very poor explanation. For Matthew, as we perceive, makes an express reference to the very word, and to the ancient Nazarites, whose holiness was of a peculiar character. He tells us, that what was then shadowed out in the Nazarites, who were, in some sense, selected as the first-fruits to God, must have been fulfilled in the person of Christ.

But it remains to be seen, in what part of Scripture the prophets have stated that this name would be given to Christ. Chrysostom, finding himself unable to loose the knot, cuts it by saying, that many books of the prophets have perished. But this answer has no probability: for, though the Lord, in order to punish the indifference of his ancient people, deprived them of some part of Scripture, or left out what was less necessary, yet, since the coming of Christ, no part of it has been lost. In support of that view, a strange blunder has been made, by quoting a passage of Josephus, in which he states that Ezekiel left two books: for Ezekiel’s prophecy of a new temple and kingdom is manifestly distinct from his other predictions, and may be said to form a new work. But if all the books of Scripture which were extant in the time of Matthew, remain entire to the present day, we must find somewhere the passage quoted from the prophets.

Bucer (222) has explained it, I think, more correctly than any other writer. He thinks that the reference is to a passage in the Book of Judges: The child shall be a Nazarite unto God from the womb, (Jud 13:5.) These words, no doubt, were spoken with regard to Samson. But Samson is called the “Redeemer” or “Deliverer” (223) of the people, only because he was a figure of Christ, and because the salvation, which was accomplished by his instrumentality, was a sort of prelude of the full salvation, which was at length exhibited to the world by the Son of God. (224) All that Scripture predicts, in a favorable manner, about Samson, may justly be applied to Christ. To express it more clearly, Christ is the original model: Samson is the inferior antitype. (225) When he assumed the character of a Redeemer, (226) we ought to understand, that none of the titles bestowed on that illustrious and truly divine office apply so strictly to himself as to Christ: for the fathers did but taste the grace of redemption, which we have been permitted to receive fully in Christ.

Matthew uses the word prophets in the plural number. This may easily be excused: for the Book of Judges was composed by many prophets. But I think that what is here said about the prophets has a still wider reference. For Joseph, who was a temporal Savior of the Church, and was, in many respects, a figure, or rather a lively image of Christ, is called a Nazarite of his brethren, (227) (Gen 49:26; Deu 33:16.) God determined that the distinguished honor, of which he had given a specimen in Joseph, should shine again in Samson, and gave him the name of Nazarite, that believers, having received those early instructions, might look more earnestly at the Redeemer who was to come, who was to be separated from all,

“

That he might be the first-born among many brethren,” (Rom 8:29.)

(221) It would have been more correct to say that the noun נזר signifies a crown than a flower. “Thou shalt put the holy crown,” את נזר הקדש, (Exo 29:6.) “Thou hast profaned his crown,” נזרו, (Psa 89:39.) It is satisfactory to have the support of so eminent a critic as Dr Tholuck, who, in his very correct edition of Calvin’s Commentary on the New Testament, after the word florem, flower, places in brackets an emendation similar to what we have suggested: “ vel potius, diadematis insigne ,” — ” or rather, the emblem of a crown.” — Ed.

(222) A contemporary of our author, who was greatly admired, not only for the extent of his learning in a very learned age, but for the soundness of his judgment. He is hardly ever mentioned but with deep respect. — Ed.

(223) The remaining words of the passage (Jud 13:5) are: and he shall begin to deliver Israel out of the hands of the Philistines; which our author interprets as having a prophetic reference to Christ. — Ed.

(224) “ Le salut qu’a receu le peuple par son moyen, a este comme une representation ayant quelques traces du vray et parfait salut, lequel finalement le Fils de Dieu a apporte et presente au monde.” — “The salvation which the people received by his agency was, as it were, a representation, having some traces of the true and perfect salvation, which the Son of God finally brought and presented to the world.”

(225) “ Pour le dire plus clairement en deux mots, Christ est le vray patron accompli en perfection, mais Samson est un pourtrait legerement tire et trac, dessus.” — “To state it more clearly in two words, Christ is the true Defender fulfilled in perfection: but Samson is a portrait lightly traced and drawn below.”

(226) Deliverer.

(227) In both of the passages quoted above, the words נזיר אחיו are rendered, in the English version, separated from his brethren. This brings out pretty faithfully the meaning of נזיר, separated, but does not suggest the allusion, which Calvin supposes to be made to the peculiar acceptation given by the ceremonial law to נזיר, from which our word Nazarite is derived. Hebrew scholars must judge for themselves as to the probability of the allusion. Without entering into that inquiry, which would occupy more space than we could easily spare, we have thought it due to our Author to hint, that the two passages which he quotes, and which at first sight appear to have no bearing on his argument, contain the very word in questlon. — Ed.

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

(23) He shall be called a Nazarene.For an account of Nazareth, see Note on Luk. 1:26. Here it will be enough to deal with St. Matthews reference to the name as in itself the fulfilment of a prophetic thought. He does not, as before, cite the words of any one prophet by name, but says generally that what he quotes had been spoken by or through the prophets. No such words are to be found in the Old Testament. It is not likely that the Evangelist would have quoted from any apocryphal prophecy, nor is there any trace of the existence of such a prophecy. The true explanation is to be found in the impression made on his mind by the verbal coincidence of fact with prediction. He had heard men speak with scorn of the Nazarene, and yet the very syllables of that word had also fallen on his ears in one of the most glorious of the prophecies admitted to be MessianicThere shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Netzer (Branch) shall grow out of his roots (Isa. 11:1). So he found in the word of scorn the nomen et omen of glory. The town of Nazareth probably took its name from this meaning of the word, as pointing, like our -hurst and -holt, to the trees and shrubs for which it was conspicuous. The general reference to the prophets is explained by the fact that the same thought is expressed in Jer. 23:5; Jer. 33:15; Zec. 3:8; Zec. 6:12, though there the Hebrew word is Zemach, and not Netzer. A like train of thought is found in the language of Tertullian and other early Christian writers to their heathen opponentsYou call us Christians, they say, worshippers of Christos, but you pronounce the words Chrestiani and Chrestos, i.e., you give us a name which in your own language (Greek) means good, and so you unconsciously bear testimony to the life we really lead. This seems the only tenable explanation of the passage. It is hardly likely that the Evangelist should have referred to the scorn with which Nazareth was regarded. Any reference to the Nazarite vow is out of the question, (1) because the two words are spelt differently, both in Greek and Hebrew, and (2) because our Lords life represented quite a different aspect of holiness from that of which the Nazarite vow was the expression. That vow, as seen pre-eminently in the Baptist, represented the consecration which consists in separation from the world. The life of Christ manifested the higher form of consecration which is found in being in the world but not of it, mingling with the men and women who compose it, in order to purify and save.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

23. A city called Nazareth Though Matthew wrote for Jewish readers, familiar with Nazareth, his words seem to imply the contrary. This we shall soon explain. Nazareth A small village embosomed in a valley in the southwestern part of Galilee. It was very obscure; it is not mentioned in the Old Testament. According to Hengstenberg, its name is derived from the Hebrew word Netzer, signifying a branch; or rather sprout, or germ; the place being so called from its insignificance. Its fame has solely risen from the residence of the Saviour there. Indeed, the place is a fit emblem of him. Beginning from a germ, it has risen to a tree in fame, and will fill the earth.

Stanley gives the following account of Nazareth:

“It is one peculiarity of the Galilean hills, as distinct from those of Ephraim or Judah, that they contain or sustain green basins of table-land just below their topmost ridges. Such above all is NAZARETH. Fifteen gently rounded hills ‘seem as if they had met to form an enclosure’ for this peaceful basin; ‘they rise round it like the edge of a shell to guard it from intrusion. It is a rich and beautiful field’ in the midst of these green hills, abounding in gay flowers, in fig-trees, small gardens, hedges of the prickly pear; and the dense, rich grass affords an abundant pasture. The village stands on the steep slope of the southwestern side of the valley.

“From the crest of the hills which thus screen it, especially from that called ‘Nebi-Said,’ or ‘Ismail,’ on the western side, is one of the most striking views in Palestine. There are Tabor, with its rounded dome, on the northeast, Hermon’s white top in the distant north, Carmel and the Mediterranean Sea to the west, a conjunction of those three famous mountains, probably unique in the views of Palestine. And in the nearer prospect, there are the uplands in which Nazareth itself stands, its own circular basin behind it; on the west, enclosed by similar hills overhanging the plain of Acre, lies the town of Sepphorieh, the Roman capital. On the south and southeast lies the broad plain of Esdraelon, overhung by the high pyramidal hill which, as the highest point of the Nazareth range, and thus the most conspicuous to travelers approaching from the plain, has received, though without any historical ground, the name of the ‘Mount of Precipitation.’ These are the natural features which for nearly thirty years met the almost daily view of Him who increased in wisdom and stature’ within this beautiful seclusion. It is the seclusion which constitutes its peculiarity and its fitness for these scenes of the Gospel history. Unknown and unnamed in the Old Testament, Nazareth first appears as the retired abode of the humble carpenter. Its separation from the busy world may be the ground, as it certainly is an illustration, of the evangelist’s play on the word, ‘He shall be called a Nazarene.’ Its wild character, high up in the Galilean hills, may account both for the roughness of its population, unable to appreciate their own Prophet; and for the evil reputation which it had acquired even in the neighbouring villages, one of whose inhabitants, Nathaniel of Cana, said, ‘Can any good thing come out of Nazareth?’ There, secured within the natural barrier of the hills, was passed that youth, of which the most remarkable characteristic is its absolute obscurity; and thence came the name of NAZARENE, used of old by the Jews, and used still by Mussulmans, as the appellation of that despised sect which has now embraced the civilized world.”

Spoken by the prophets Not by any one prophet in express terms, but by several of the prophets, in general substance.

He shall be called a Nazarene The name of Nazarene was but another word for despised one. Hence, although no prophet has ever said anything of the word Nazarene, yet all those prophecies describing the Messiah as a despised one are fulfilled in his being a Nazarene.

Such is the ordinary interpretation, and we concur in it; and the reader is welcome to consider it sufficient. But we are convinced, in spite of the denial of most commentators, that, as Hengstenberg has shown, something more than this is intended. The Hebrew word for Nazareth was Netzer, a branch, or rather germ. Matthew wrote for Hebrews, and in his Hebrew the sentence would read thus: He dwelt in a city called Germ, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, saying, he shall be called a Germ, or Germinal One. Thereby would be fulfilled all that cluster of prophecies in which the Hebrew name Netzer, Branch or Germ, or its near synonym, is applied to Messiah. Thus, Zec 6:12: Behold the man whose name is Branch, or Germ. The term in prophecy is expressive of the slender origin of the Messiah. This whole circle of prophecies, indeed, is embraced in this of Isa 11:1: There shall come forth a rod from the fallen stem of Jesse and (Netzer,) a branch (germ) from his roots shall bear fruit. That is, from the decayed family stock of David, a feeble sprout shall put forth and grow to great final power. A prophecy this by which the evangelical history is wonderfully confirmed. Humble, obscure, and, as it seems to some, mean as the Gospel origin appears, it is by that very fact a fulfilment of stupendous prophecies. In support of this view we may remark:

1 . There is a class of name-predictions in Scripture, of which this is a just specimen. Thus Isaiah gives his sons predictive names, (Isa 8:3; Isa 8:18; Isa 7:3,) which are fulfilled. Melchisedek is a type of Christ by being “King of Salem, that is, King of Peace.” This last is a precisely similar case. Salem, signifying peace, is, like Netzer, a topographical divine name-prediction of Christ’s prophetic character.

2 . This interpretation makes the evangelist affirm that there was a divinely intended correspondence in name between the name of the city Netzer and Christ’s prophetic appellative Netzer; and that to mark this correspondence, Providence directed that the living Netzer should have his residence in the village Netzer. Thus would the popular attention be drawn to the prophecy and to its fulfilment.

3 . The fulfilment does not stop at the mere name. Nazareth is called a germ from its insignificance; yet it shall, through him, fill the earth with its importance. So it is an emblem of Him, the living Nazareth, who at first is but a Germ, but shall fill the earth with his glory. And as there is a correspondence in the name and thing, so they both continue to fulfil the prophetic predictions of the Netzer, so that there is a triple prophetic cord.

4 . By this wise plan of combining an external and audible fulfilment (so customary in prophecy) with the written one, a broad publicity is given to the great fact. It is transferred from the hidden books to the open land, and infused into the common speech. Providence has written a notice of the prophecy on the surface of the earth, as on a map, by the name of Nazareth, and has noted its fulfilment by placing Jesus, the germinal Netzer, there. And he has so contrived that every time a Jew speaks of Jesus as the Netzer, or Nazarene, he reminds himself of a fulfilled prophecy.

5 . This view confirms the interpretation which finds in the name Nazarene a symbol of humble origin. Nathaniel’s question, Can any good come out of Nazareth? shows that as Galilee was the odium of Palestine, so Nazareth was the odium even of Galilee.

6 . We now may see the true import of the phrase beginning this verse, a city called Nazareth. It implies not that the city was new to Matthew’s readers, for that was not the fact. It implies that Jesus was divinely directed to inhabit a city called by that name, in order that a name- prediction might be fulfilled. It so demonstrates our interpretation. The meaning, then, would be: He came to a city called Netzer that by being himself called a Netzer, the prophecies which predict him as a Netzer might be evidently verified. Or: He came to a city called Germ, that the prophecies which, for substance, predict him as a Germ, may be fulfilled in his very name, as well as condition.

Finally, it is worthy to be observed what a number of name-predictions concur in our Lord, as threads to a common knot. As his name Jesus asserts that he is a predicted Saviour, and antitype to Joshua, the bringer of his people to Canaan; as his appellative, Christ, declares him the end of all the Messianic prophecies; as his name Emmanuel proclaims him the Incarnate One of the Edenic prophecy and all ancient expectation, so his civic appellation Netzer, Nazarene, Branch, Germ, reminds us of a whole cluster of germinal prophecies, while the very spot in which he dwells is a type of the very points which the name designates. And finally, the prevalence of that appellation compels men, Jew or Gentile, the world over, to utter a perpetual reminder to themselves of the prophetic fulfilment. Pity if commentators should take much pains to obscure the reminder.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

‘That it might be fulfilled which was spoken through the prophets, that he should be called a Nazarene.’

To be ‘called a Nazarene’ was to be looked down on as backward and insignificant, for Nazareth was an obscure hill town in Galilee, and even Galilee was spoken of contemptuously by the people of Judaea as ‘Galilee of the Gentiles’, unorthodox and tainted by association with the Gentiles. So to be a Nazarene was to be a nonentity, living in an obscure town in despised Galilee. It was to be like a root struggling to survive in dry ground (Isa 53:2). For while Galilean Jews were accepted as being full Jews, (although many of their fathers had been forced to become so by compulsory circumcision), they were seen as somewhat unorthodox, and even their Rabbis were not considered to be quite as orthodox as they should be. And they were intermingled with Gentiles. Thus they were ‘looked down on’ by their more orthodox brethren in Judaea and Jerusalem (see for example Joh 7:41; Joh 7:52). But even more looked down on were the residents of Nazareth in Galilee. For Nazareth was a smallish out of the way town in the hills, away from the main thoroughfares, which it overlooked from a height, a town which had somehow gained a reputation for being a backward nonentity. Thus if Galilee was despised, Nazareth was even more despised, for it was despised even by those who lived in Galilee. It was the lowest of the low. That was why Nathaniel could say, ‘Can anything good come out of Nazareth?’ (Joh 1:46). And even at the time that Matthew was written, (whenever it was), the Jews looked down on Christians and called them ‘the sect of the Nazarenes’, which was intended to be insulting indicating these backward people living in obscurity (Act 24:5).

Note that this ‘quotation’ is not said to be a direct citation. His statement is not referred to ‘a prophet’. It is referred to ‘the prophets’ as a whole. It is thus to be seen as representing a general principle spoken of by the prophets which was to be ‘filled to the full’.

So Matthew’s point here is that quite deliberately Joseph and Mary have gone back to live in that unpretentious town in the hills where Mary at least had once had her home, thus fulfilling all the Old Testament prophecies which spoke of the Coming One as being the lowliest of men (see especially Psa 22:6; Isa 53:1-5; Zec 9:12; Zec 11:7-14). Here therefore ‘He shall be called a Nazarene’ indicates that He would be seen as the lowest of the low, as the Scriptures had declared would be the case.

Matthew has previously not mentioned any connection of Mary and Joseph with Nazareth, and that has been deliberate. For he had been concerned to emphasise the Davidic connection of Jesus, and His royal birth and treatment by the Magi, but now he also seeks to draw attention to His lowliness as He ‘returns from Exile’, thus filling in both aspects of Zec 9:12. The One Who was the Son of David, born in royal Bethlehem and honoured by the Magi, had like Israel of old fled to Egypt, and had now descended in status to lowly Nazareth. It was fitting for One Who would later have nowhere to lay His head, and was to be depicted as the humble Servant of the Lord.

Other have connected the words with Isa 11:1, where the ‘branch’ is a ‘netser’. Thus ‘He will be called a netser’. But the connection of this with the name of Nazareth is tenuous, and if Matthew had intended that he would surely have drawn attention to the fact, for it is not obvious in the Greek. The same is true of interpretations that seek to connect the idea with Nazirites, which is spelled differently and comes from a different root. All also founder on the fact that Matthew referred it to ‘the prophets’ not ‘the prophet’. Thus the probability is that we are to see Matthew as reading into the words ‘He will be called a Nazarene’ all the contempt that was intrinsic in the idea of being an inhabitant of Nazareth.

Note on Galilee.

That Galileans were despised by the Judeans is unquestionable, but this should not hide from us the fact that Galilee was a flourishing country, with a large population for its size (it was fifty miles by twenty five miles), with many populous ‘cities’, and very fertile, rich soil and pasturage. Indeed its fertility was proverbial. The Galileans were innovative, courageous, and ‘disposed to change and delighting in seditions’. They were ever ready for a fight. But they were also brave, true and honourable. Many of them were fanatical Jews, even though looked on by Judeans as a little unorthodox, although their Jewishness was not in question. Furthermore the trade routes all passed though Galilee. It thus had far greater contact with the Gentile world than did out of the way Judaea. Indeed it was surrounded by Gentiles, with Samaritans to the South, and many Gentiles lived among them. It had in fact been largely Gentile, and 100 or so years earlier Aristobulus had conquered Galilee for the Jewish nation, with the result that many Gentiles had been forced to be circumcised and become Jews. So it was not for nothing that it was called ‘Galilee of the Gentiles’.

End of note.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

v. 22. b. Notwithstanding, being warned of God in a dream, he turned aside into the parts of Galilee:

v. 23. and he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth; that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene.

So Joseph returned to his former city, which had also been Mary’s home, Luk 1:26; Luk 2:4. Nazareth was a small city southwest of the Sea of Galilee, not far from Cana, on the one side, and from Mount Tabor, on the west. It was situated on the slope of a hill, and was surrounded by beautiful and grand scenery. It was here that Jesus lived until He entered upon His ministry, Luk 2:51; Luk 4:16; Mat 3:13.

This reference of the evangelist to a fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy has ever caused difficulties, since there is no individual passage, with the exact contents as given, in the writings referred to. It is significant, however, that Matthew writes: “Which was spoken by the prophets,” thus indicating a general type rather than an explicit text. The most plausible explanation: “Nazarene” or “man of Nazareth” contains the reference. For the name Nazareth is derived from a Hebrew root meaning a branch or tender offshoot. Thus the Messiah is called in Isa 11:1. And this passage is analogous to the expressions used in Isa 53:2; Isa 4:2; Jer 23:5; Jer 33:15; Zec 3:8; Zec 6:12, and to other descriptions of the humble appearance of the Messiah. See Joh 1:46. Others have suggested that the reference is to Jdg 13:7. “It is with the prophetic references in the gospels as with songs without words. The composer has a certain scene or state of mind in his view, and writes under its inspiration. But you are not in his secret, and cannot tell when you hear the music what it means. But let the key be given, and immediately you find new meaning in the music. The prophecies are the music; the key is the history.”

Summary. The Magi having been directed to Bethlehem by a special star and by prophetic direction, give to the Christ-child divine adoration, while the life of the Savior is preserved from the cruelty of Herod by divine interposition, which directs Joseph first to Egypt, then to Galilee.

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

Mat 2:23. A city called Nazareth Which was a small town of the lower Galilee, near the frontiers of the tribes of Zebulon and Issachar. In the description of the Nazarite given Numbers 6 we learn that he was first to abstain from wine and all vinous liquors; secondly, to let his hair grow; thirdly, not to defile himself with the dead. Now in each of these particulars, as we have observed on the 21st verse of that chapter, the Nazarite was a lively type of Christ; whose extraordinary endowments, as man, were not from any natural causes, but from above, even from the Spirit of God: who was invested with all power and authority, of which hair was an emblem; (see Jdg 20:22. Compare 1Co 11:7 in the Greek;) and who was intirely separate from dead works, from sin and sinners. It would be needless, and far exceed my present bounds, to quote the prophesies wherein the Messiah is described as endowed with these high qualifications. Many of the predictions concerning Christ may be reduced to one or other of these heads; and, in order to turn the attention of men to him as the true Nazarite, in which the type was completely fulfilled, it is remarkably observed here by St. Matthew, that he came and dwelt at Nazareth; that what was spoken by the prophets might be fulfilled, he shall be called, that is to say, shall be truly and justly , a Nazarite; so the Vulgate, Nazaraeus. Thus, while the Jews and Romans were calling him in contempt the Nazarene, the providence of God was at the same time pointing him out to mankind as thetrue Nazarite, from the circumstance of his dwelling in that city which had been prophetically, with a view, no doubt, to this important event, called Nazareth, or the City of the Nazarites. Parkhurst on the word nezer. It may be proper just to observe, that there are other and different expositions given of this prophesy. The editors of the Prussian Testament agree with the margin of our English Bible, and think that the passage referred to is either Jdg 13:5 where Samson, a type of the Messiah, is spoken of; or Isa 11:1 where the Messiah is styled the Netzer or Branch; while Wetstein, Doddridge, Macknight, and many others, suppose that the expression refers to the mean and despicable circumstances of the Messiah, and the reproachful mannerwherein he was treated, agreeable to several prophetical passages of Scripture. But Houbigant is of opinion, that the evangelist refers to the blessings of Jacob and Moses, in each of which Joseph, as a type of the Messiah, is called Nezir, or Nazarite. See Gen 49:26. Deu 33:16 and Houbigant’s note on the last place.

Inferences.The love of our Redeemer for a mean and private life appears from the first moment of his birth, in the choice which he makes of Bethlehem.

Those who are nearest to Christ very often know him not, when those who are farther off seek and adore him. How great was the faith of these wise men, and how illustrious a testimony did they bear to the dignity of our Lord’s person! Surely the readiness that they shewed, and the fatiguing journey which they so willingly undertook to pay their adoration to their infant Saviour, should awaken in our souls an anxious concern, not to be excelled by them in duty and devotion to this divine Lord, now that we enjoy the better and more abiding light of his Gospel, that glorious day-spring from on high. With what cheerfulness should we present ourselves and all we have to him! opening the treasuries of our hearts, and offering before him the valuable presents of humble faith and adoring love!

It is not to be supposed that God would have guided these wise men in this extraordinary manner, merely to pay a transient compliment to Jesus; their prostrations, no doubt, expressed religious adoration as well as civil respect; and it is not unlikely that their report might in due time make way for the reception of the Gospel, in the country whence they came. Gentiles as they were, we cannot help looking upon them as the first-fruits of the nations to Christ. This circumstance of the sacred history affords a beautiful emblem of that glorious state of the Christian church, foretold by the prophets, when the Gentiles should come down to its light, and sages and kings to the brightness of its rising; when the abundance of the sea should be converted to it, and the wealth of the Gentiles consecrated to its honour.

We may observe here how Jews and Gentiles conferred together about Jesus Christ. The Gentiles know the time of his birth by a star; the Jews know the time of it by the Scripture; and so they are capable of informing one another. It would contribute much to the increase of knowledge, if we were thus mutually to communicate what we know. Men grow rich by bartering and exchange; so, if we have knowledge to communicate to others, they will be ready to communicate to us. Thus many shall discourse, shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased. Even a Herod, you may remark, consults the priests and teachers of the law in matters of religious concernment: and to inspire us with reverence for the oracles of God, these priests presume not to answer the question, but by a reference to the Scriptures of truth.

How very conspicuous did the wisdom and power of divine Providence appear in the preservation of the infant Jesus! and in thwarting the vile hypocrisy and execrable cruelty of the tyrant Herod! There is no understanding, or wisdom, or counsel against the Lord; no scheme so artfully disguised that he cannot penetrate it; or so politically formed, that he cannot with infinite ease confound it.

To what perplexity and grief might these sages have been brought, had they been made even the innocent instruments of an assault on this holy child! But God delivered them from such an alarm, and happily guided their return (Mat 2:12.); so that through his care and favour they carried home, in the tidings of the new-born Messiah, far richer treasures than they had left behind. Thus shall they, who in all their ways acknowledge God, by one method or another find that he will graciously direct their paths!

We may remark how God in his providence makes the cruelty of a Herod subservient to the publication of his Son’s birth, and to the accomplishment of his designs with respect to him. He reduces, within the order of his goodness, the greatest disorders of human wickedness. He makes that Egypt, which was once the seat of persecution and oppression to his chosen people, a refuge to his Son; and thus all places will be to us what the providence of God shall be pleased to make them.
How many instructive lessons may we derive from this inhuman massacre of the innocents at Bethlehem! We are hence taught that, afflictions are not arguments of guilt, since innocent children were made a sacrifice to the ambition of a cruel tyrant: that we ought to be ready to part with what is dear to us as our own children, whenever they may become instruments of God’s glory: that what oppression soever innocence meets with from the hands of wicked men, it is for the good of those who suffer it: that the conduct of those parents who neglect the education and instruction of their children in Christian and virtuous principles, exceeds the cruelty of a Herod(he only deprived little innocents of this life; they expose their own bowels to eternal death): and that to be true disciples of Christ, we must become as little children in the frame and temper of our minds; without which we cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven. “Mortify, therefore, and kill in us all vices, great God of our salvation; and so strengthen us through thy grace, that by the innocency of our lives, and the constancy of our faith, even unto death, we may glorify thy holy name, through Jesus Christ our Lord!”

REFLECTIONS.1st, Though the birth of Jesus, the King of kings, was ushered into the world with none of those rejoicings that usually attend the nativity of the princes of the earth, we have some instances of very distinguished notice paid to the infant Saviour.

1. Wise men came from the east, led by the observance of an extraordinary star which appeared in the heavens. Who they were, and whence they came, we are not clearly told; the most approved opinion seems to be, that they were of the Persian Magi, among whom some tradition seems to have obtained of a great prince at that time about to come into the world, which possibly might arise from Baalam’s prophesy, or from their acquaintance with the Jewish scriptures; which, during the captivity, were probably brought among them: and this expectation, Tacitus observes, was spread through the east. (But see the critical notes.) As these Magi were very conversant in astronomy, the uncommon luminous phaenomenon, a meteor, or star, which they observed over Judaea, might have led them thither, concluding that this was the signal of his appearing, as they might be assured also by a divine impulse on their minds. They were Gentiles, it is certain, and this was a happy presage of their future conversion; and their wisdom most eminently appeared in coming to him, the knowledge of whom alone could make them wise unto salvation. The highest attainments in science, without this wisdom, are no better than splendid ignorance.
2. They directed their journey to Jerusalem the capital, naturally concluding there to meet with all needful information. Herod at that time reigned in Judaea, an Edomite, set up by the Romans, under whose power the Jews were, the sceptre being now departed from Shiloh; and to him it should seem they applied themselves, inquiring after the child who was born King of the Jews, concerning whom they speak with the greatest confidence; and having seen his star in the east, the intimation of his birth, were come to worship him; either to pay him their civil homage, or rather to offer divine adoration. Note; (1.) They who know the value of Christ’s favour, will stop at no pains in following him whithersoever he calls them. (2.) Jesus is truly the object worthy of our adoration, even in his lowest humiliation; the babe in the manger is still the mighty God, the everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace.

3. This inquiry of the wise men exceedingly affected Herod. He could be no stranger to the prophesies concerning the Messiah; and the time of the accomplishment of them was confessedly now at hand. He was troubled therefore lest his own throne should be shaken; and the people in general who heard the account seem alike disturbed, fearing possibly the tumults which they might perhaps suppose would be the consequence of a struggle for the crown, as they had, in general, no notion of the Messiah as a spiritual Saviour, but as a mighty prince and conqueror. (But see the notes.) Note; Worldly hearts are ever afraid, lest the spreading of the kingdom of Jesus should clash with their interests.

4. To give them a resolution of the question, and perhaps to gain particular information himself, for purposes that his mind already harboured, he called a council of the chief priests, those most distinguished for station and abilities, and the scribes learned in the law, and most conversant with the prophesies, that he might have their concurring sentiments concerning the place where the Christ, the Messiah should be born. And thus, by divine providence, this wicked king, who consulted them with the vilest design, is made the instrument of obtaining a distinguished suffrage, even from the wisest of the Jewish nation, to the place of the Messiah’s birth, and where the babe Jesus actually was born.

5. They are unanimous in their opinion; for the prophet Micah has expressly determined the place to be Bethlehem of Judaea, chap. Mat 5:2 and they cite the prophesy, in sense the same with the original, though with some variation in the expression. Thence the ruler and governor of his Israel should arise, and who is and ever will be the Lord of his faithful saints, reigning in their hearts, and bringing them into subjection to his blessed self.

6. Herod hereupon dismisses the wise men in search of this child, after examining them in private with the greatest accuracy concerning the time when the star appeared, and having concerted in his own mind the bloody project of cutting off him whom he eyed already with jealousy as the rival of his throne: and therefore he strictly charges them, after having made diligent search at Bethlehem, to return, and acquaint him with the place of his abode, hypocritically pretending a desire to pay his worship to the young child born and destined of God to such distinguished honour. So often has the mask of religion concealed the foulest designs.
None of his courtiers were sent with these strangers: perhaps he was afraid to awaken the suspicion of the parents of Jesus, his ambition and cruelty being fully known; or so God, in his over-ruling providence, ordered it; who taketh the wise in their own craftiness, and can divert the enemies of his people from using the most obvious means which they seem to have in their power to distress or destroy them.
2nd, With attention and respect the wise men received their directions, and departed in search of the king of the Jews. And,
1. We find them happily conducted to the spot where he is. The star which they had seen at Christ’s birth, afterwards disappeared; at least, if, as some suggest, it led them to the borders of Judaea, it then left them, but now returned, hanging low in the sky, and moving on before them till it stood over the house where Jesus was: for before this, it seems, his parents had changed the place of his birth in a stable, for a more commodious abode. The return of the star, as it promised them a happy issue of their journey, rejoiced them exceedingly; and under its guidance being led to the house, they entered without farther inquiry: and finding the child with his virgin-mother, they immediately prostrated themselves before him, worshipping him as their God, or honouring him as their king. And according to the eastern custom, of making presents to their monarchs when they make their addresses to them, they opened their treasures, and presented him gold, frankincense, and myrrh, Isa 60:6 and thus also providentially supplied Joseph and Mary with a sufficiency for the long journey they were quickly after called to undertake. Note; (1.) When we are found in the way of duty, using the means that God hath given us, we shall not be left without a guide. (2.) The word of God, and the ministry of it, is now this star to lead us to Jesus; and blessed and happy are they who follow its direction. (3.) When for a while we have been in the darkness of affliction, temptation, or desertion, with double joy we behold the re-appearing of the day-star to our benighted souls, and rejoice with exceeding great joy. (4.) Jesus is the object of our adorations; to him every knee must bow. (5.) The Lord by strange and unexpected ways often supplies the wants of his people: they who trust him, will assuredly own that he has never failed them in time of need.

2. To prevent their return to Jerusalem according to Herod’s desire, God, by a dream, which carried its own evidence that it came from him, probably the very day or night after their arrival at Bethlehem, warned them not to go back to Herod; and accordingly they immediately departed into their own country another way. So easily can God blast the malicious designs of the ungodly.
3rdly, No sooner were the wise men departed, than God, who knew the cruel intentions of Herod, takes care of the safety of the child Jesus.
1. The Lord in a dream apprizes Joseph of the danger to which the young child was exposed; and bids him, without delay, secure the babe with his mother in Egypt, from the fury of this bloody king, and expect farther directions there. Immediately that very night he arose, and fled with his family to this appointed place of refuge, and there continued till the death of Herod, which soon followed the massacre of the infants. Note; (1.) The place where God’s people suffered the bitterest persecution affords an asylum for his Son: so easily can he who has in his hands the hearts of all men, make our once inveterate enemies our firmest friends. (2.) The faithful heart obeys God’s commands without hesitation or delay: having committed our all to him, we must be safe under his guidance.

2. Particular notice is taken of the fulfilling of the scripture herein; out of Egypt have I called my son, Hos 11:1 which, whatever reference it has to Israel as a people, had now its most direct accomplishment in the flight of Jesus thither, and his return thence.

4thly, We are told, as we might have expected from the character of this wicked prince,
1. The fury he was in at being disappointed by the wise men. He waited from day to day, in expectation of receiving intelligence from them; but hearing at last they were gone home another way, his jealousy was more inflamed against his supposed rival, and his wrath more exasperated.
2. The politic but inhuman contrivance that he formed to rid himself of his fears. He slew all the male children under two years of age, in all Bethlehem, and the territory belonging to it; being satisfied from the information he had received of the wise men, that the infant king could not exceed that age, and therefore must perish in this general massacreAn instance of barbarity, which though most agreeable to the character of that savage monarch, who had with his own hand slain his own children, we cannot read without horror; so that Augustus might well say, it was better to be Herod’s swine than his son. The first crown of martyrdom for Jesus was won by these infant sufferers; and the honour to which they are advanced, infinitely repays the torments that they endured.

3. The fulfilment of the scripture herein is again observed; and to this event, no doubt, the prophet had immediate regard, Jer 31:15. For, though we see it fulfilled in a measure, when the sword of the Chaldeans, and the captivity of the Jews which ensued, awakened Rachel, as it were, from her grave, which was near Bethlehem, to lament her children destroyed, or led to Babylon; yet, in a peculiarly striking manner may this tender mother’s griefs be now said to overflow, when so many of her daughters raved with inconsolable anguish for their infants torn from their bosoms, and writhing on the spear of inhuman murderers. Note; Though God does not forbid us to bewail the ravages that death makes in our families; yet inconsolable grief is sinful. Christians must never sorrow as if they had no hope, or as if their comforts were all bound up in a dying worm.

5thly, The sojourning of our Lord in Egypt was but short. Quickly after the massacre of the infants, Herod was struck with a mortal disease, loathsome, and incurable, which made him a spectacle to others, and a torment to himself. So soon can God humble proud tyrants, and make them feel that wrath which they would not fear. Hereupon,
1. The Lord sent his angel, who informs Joseph, in a dream, of Herod’s death, and bids him arise, since he may now safely return to the land of Israel. They who are driven far from the ordinances of God, and his people, wish to be no longer absent from them than necessity obliges them.
2. Joseph is all obedience, cheerful readiness in following God’s direction being the sure effect of real devotedness to his will. He returns with the child and his mother to the land of Israel; but hearing that Archelaus, a son of Herod’s, and an inheritor of his brutal temper, reigned in Judaea, he was justly afraid of settling under his jurisdiction; and in this emergence again the Lord signifies his pleasure to him by his angel, and points him out a place of safety, in the obscure retreat of Nazareth, a little town in Galilee, then under the government of Antipas, another of Herod’s children, but a man of a milder temper than his brother. Note; (1.) They who are willing to follow the path of duty if they knew it, shall be directed aright. (2.) No danger must deter us when we have God’s call to go; but we must not willingly rush into temptation. (3.) God will find a quiet resting-place for his faithful people sometimes under the sun, but assuredly above it.

3. This was done also, that the scripture might be fulfilled, which said, He shall be called a Nazarene: either this refers to Isa 11:1 where Christ is called a branch, netzer, out of the root of Jesse, the city Nazareth deriving its name from this word: or to Jdg 13:5. Samson being the type of the great Nazarite and Saviour Jesus. Or rather in general, the prophesies which foretold his mean appearance, and the contempt and reproach that he should be exposed to, were thus fulfilled; Nazareth being a despicable place, and his very coming thence was urged by his enemies as an argument against his mission, can any good thing come out of so mean and contemptible a place as Nazareth? Note; They who are followers of Jesus of Nazareth, must not be ashamed of his reproach, nor of any opprobrious names with which his enemies and theirs may seek to render them odious or despicable. The disciple is then but as his Lord.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

Mat 2:23 . ] to Galilee.

] does not belong to (Fritzsche, Olshausen), but to , beside which it stands in Gen 13:18 ; . includes the movement connected with the settlement, and that in such a way that the latter was the predominating element in the thought of the writer: he went and settled at Nazareth . Comp. Mat 4:13 ; Act 7:4 ; 2Ch 19:4 . See Khner, I. p. 471.

Nazareth [373] ] in Lower Galilee, in the tribe of Zabulon, situated on a hill (Luk 4:20 ), with pleasant environs. Robinson, Palst . III. p. 419 ff.; Ritter, Erdk . XVI. p. 739 ff.; Furer, Wander, durch Palst . p. 267 ff.; Tobler, Nazar. in Palst ., 1868. Mentioned neither in the O. T. nor in Josephus.

] in order that . See Mat 1:22 .

.] not the plural of category (Mat 2:20 , so Fritzsche), according to which Isaiah only could be meant, but the prophets generally , Luk 18:31 ; Rom 1:2 .

] not the Recitativum , although its use in the Gospel of Matthew cannot be denied, Mat 7:23 , Mat 9:18 , Mat 14:26 , Mat 27:43 ; Mat 27:47 , but “ that ,” as no individual express statement is quoted.

] of Nazareth , Mat 26:71 . In Isa 11:1 , the Messiah, as the offspring of David, is called , shoot , with which, in the representation of the evangelist, this designation was identified, only expressed by another word, namely, (Jer 23:5 ; Jer 33:15 ; Zec 3:8 ; Zec 6:12 ; Isa 4:2 ); therefore he wrote, . In giving this prophetic title of to the Messiah, he entirely disregards the historical meaning of the same (LXX. Isa 11:1 : ), keeps by the relationship of the name Nazareth to the word , and recognises, by virtue of the same, in that prophetic Messianic name Nezer , the typical reference to this, that Jesus, through His settlement in Nazareth, was to become a ; the translator therefore, rightly apprehending this typical reference, expressed the Hebrew by , although he may have also found in the original Hebrew draft of the Gospel , or, more probably, . The evangelist must in any case have derived the name Nazareth from , and it is likewise probable in itself; see Hengstenberg, Christol . II. p. 124 ff. “ Eruditi Hebraei ” already referred the . . back to the ; see Jerome on Isa 11:1 , and, more recently, Piscator, Casaubon, Jansen, Maldonatus, Surenhusius, Bauer ( bibl. Theol. I. p. 163), Fritzsche, Gieseler, Kern, Krabbe, de Wette, B. Crusius, Kstlin, Bleek, Hengstenberg, Kahnis, Anger, formerly also Hilgenfeld. But others (Chrysostom, Theophylact, Clericus, Grtz) regard the words as a quotation from a lost prophetical book. But always , where in the N. T. the prophets are quoted, those in the completed canon are meant. Others (Michaelis, Paulus, Kuinoel, Gersdorf, Kaffer, Olshausen, Ebrard, Lange) are of opinion that refers to the despised and melancholy position of the Messiah depicted by the prophets in accordance with Psa 22 , Isa 53 . For Nazareth was despised, see Joh 1:47 ; Joh 7:52 . But the question here is not as to a prophetic description (of the lowliness of the Messiah), but as to the definite prophetic name ( ), to which the settlement in Nazareth may correspond; and, indeed, the evangelist must have found the name itself in the prophets, and not have inserted it ex eventu , namely, because Nazareth served to make the Messiah an object of misapprehension (in answer to Hofmann, Weissag. u. Erfll. p. 66). For that reason also the opinion of others is to be rejected (Erasmus, Beza, Calvin, Grotius, Wetstein, Hilgenfeld), who, after Tertullian and Jerome, take . for the Hebrew , that it might be fulfilled that He shall be (called) a Nazarite . Jesus had neither represented Himself to be such a consecrated person, Mat 11:19 , nor can any passage in the prophets be pointed out as referring to this; therefore Ewald, in opposition to ., assumes the statement to be taken from an Apocryphal book, in which the Messiah, on His first appearance, was represented as a Nazarite , so that the evangelist was led, from the similarity of the word, to infer a reference to Nazareth. If, however, in the Hebrew , Preserver , has been supposed to be contained, and that in such a way that it had as its basis either Exo 34:6 f. (Zuschlag in Guericke’s Zeitschr. 1854, III. p. 417 ff.) or Psa 31:24 (Riggenbach in the Stud. u. Krit . 1855, p. 606 f.), then something entirely foreign is thus imported, as in those passages there is to be found neither a designation of the Messiah nor any prophetic declaration. Still more arbitrary is the reference of Hitzig in the theol. Jahrb . 1842, p. 410, to Isa 49:6 , where has been taken as singular , and explained as a predicate of the Messiah, as the leader of those who are saved. Delitzsch has referred to Isa 42:6 ; so that Christ is predicted as He who is preserved in dangers ( , Isa 49:6 ), whilst Nazareth was His place of concealment .

[373] Upon the form of the name , which, although attested as ancient in many ways, is yet found only in a few passages in the Mss. of the N. T., and very unequally supported (Tischendorf, 8th ed., has received it into the text in Mat 4:13 , and in Luk 4:16 ), see Keim, I. p. 319; comp. also Delitzsch, Jesus u. Hillel , p. 13. In the passage before us it is without any support, as well as in Mat 21:11 , and in the remaining passages of the other evangelists, except Luk 1:26 ; Luk 4:16 . The form is often found in Mss., as also . But it is the admission of (or ) alone into the text that can be justified, and that as the standing reading, all the more that even in Mat 4:13 and in Luk 4:16 there is by no means a decisive predominance of testimony for , which has no support, moreover, in Act 10:38 . Although Nazara was the original form of the name (see in answer to Ewald’s doubts, Keim, II. p. 421 f.), which is probable, it must notwithstanding have been strange to the evangelists.

REMARK.

The evangelist expresses himself in Mat 2:23 in such a manner that throughout the narrative Nazareth cannot appear to the reader as the original dwelling-place of Joseph and Mary. Bethlehem rather, according to his account, appears to be intended as such (Mat 2:22 ), whilst Nazareth was the place of sojourn under the special circumstances which occurred after the death of Herod. The account given by Luke is quite different. This variation is to be admitted, and the reconciliation of both accounts can only be brought about in an arbitrary manner, [374] which is all the more inadmissible that, on the whole, the narratives of Matthew and Luke regarding the birth and early infancy of Jesus in important points mutually exclude each other. Amid all their other variations, however, in the preliminary history in which they are independent of one another, they agree in this, that Bethlehem was the place of birth , and it is in opposition to the history to relegate this agreement to the sphere of dogmatic reflection, and to transport the birth of Jesus to Nazareth (Strauss, Hilgenfeld, Keim), since the designation of Jesus as belonging to Nazareth (Mat 13:34 ; Mar 6:1 ; Luk 4:19 ) finds its natural and complete explanation in the short and passing sojourn of His parents at Bethlehem after His birth, whereas, had Jesus Himself been a native of Galilee, He would neither have found a believing reception amongst His people, nor, on the other hand, could His Messiahship have been held to be based on a prophetic foundation. Comp. also Luk 2:39 and Joh 7:42 .

[374] That Joseph, brought to Bethlehem by the census, settled there. Matthew accordingly represents Bethlehem as his dwelling-place . The flight to Egypt, however, again soon broke up the residence in Bethlehem, so that the sojourn was only a passing one, and therefore Luke rightly regarded the subsequent settlement at Nazareth as a return thither. See Neander, Ebrard, Hofmann, Krabbe, Lange. Wieseler’s reasons also ( chronolog. Synopse , p. 35 ff.) against the view that Matthew makes Bethlehem appear as the original dwelling-place of Jesus, will not stand. This view is to be regarded, by the account in Matthew, which is to be looked on as independent , and standing by itself , as a necessary exegetical result by means of ver. 22, and is undoubtedly confirmed by ver. 23, where Joseph’s settlement in Nazareth appears as something new , which must occur in order to fulfil a prophetic prediction , so that consequently no reader of Matthew could come to think that Nazareth had been Joseph’s dwelling-place. Wieseler, however, has, moreover, strikingly demonstrated the unhistorical nature of the view that Jesus was born at Nazareth.

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

23 And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene.

Ver. 23. And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth ] Hence an opinion among the people that he was born there, Joh 7:42 and so could not be the Messiah, as the Pharisees on that ground persuaded: “For can any good come out of Nazareth?” Joh 1:46 . The devils also, though they confessed him “the Holy One of God,” Mar 1:24-25 yet they cunningly call him “Jesus of Nazareth,” to nourish the error of the multitude that thought he was born there, and so not the Christ. When one commended the Pope’s legate at the Council of Basil, Sigismund the Emperor answered, Tamen Romanus est, Nevertheless he is a Roman. So, let the devil speak true or false, fair or foul, yet he is a devil still, beware of him. Satan aliquando verax, saepius mendax, semper fallax.

That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets ] For the Book of Judges was written by various prophets, in several ages. And there be very grave authors of the opinion that Ezra (that skilful scribe) either himself alone, or with the help of his colleagues, godly and learned men like himself, inspired by the Holy Ghost, compiled and composed those books of Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings, out of divers annals preserved by the Churches of those ages wherein those things were acted.

He shall be called a Nazarene ] That great votary whereof Samson and the rest of his order were but types and shadows. The very name signifieth one separate and set apart from others, as Joseph was “separate from his brethren,” Gen 49:26 . And it is ascribed to three, sorts of men, usually set above others (as divines have well observed): 1. To such as are set apart to singular sanctimony, as the high priest, whose crown is called Nezer, Exo 29:6 ; Exo 2:1-25 . To such as in dignity and authority are set above others, as kings, whose diadem is called Nezer, 2Sa 1:10 ; 2Sa 3:1-39 . To such as were separated by some religious vow, as to the order of the Nazarites, whose hair increasing on their heads, as an external sign of their vow, was called Nezer,Num 6:5Num 6:5 . As for our Saviour, it is not likely that he nourished his hair; because the apostle saith (in that age) it was uncomely for men to have long hair, 1Co 11:14 . It was enough for him that he was a Nazarite in the truth and substance of that law; and a singular comfort it is to us, that although we have broken our vows and so deeply gashed our consciences, as Jacob did; Gen 28:20 ; Gen 31:13 yet so long as it is of infirmity and forgetfulness, not of obstinace and maliciousness, this famous Nazarite, this arch-votary, hath expiated our defaults in this kind; and through him we are in God’s sight, as Jerusalem’s Nazarites, Lam 4:7 “Purer than the snow, and whiter than the milk.” And therefore, since God thinks not the worse of us, let us not think the worse of ourselves for the involuntary violation of our vows.

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

23. ] These words refer to the divine purpose in the event, not to that of Joseph in bringing it about.

. . . ] These words are no where verbatim to be found, nor is this asserted by the Evangelist; but that the sense of the prophets is such. In searching for such sense, the following hypotheses have been made none of them satisfactory: (1) Euthymius says, , , , , . So also Chrys., Theophyl., Le Clerc, &c. But the expression . . seems to have a wider bearing than is thus implied. (2) The general sense of the prophets is, that Christ should be a despised person, as the inhabitants of Nazareth were ( Joh 1:47 ). So Michaelis, Paulus, Rosenm., Kuin., Olsh., &c. But surely this part of the Messiah’s prophetic character is not general or prominent enough, in the absence of any direct verbal connexion with the word in our text, to found such an interpretation on: nor, on the other hand, does it appear that an inhabitant of Nazareth, as such, was despised; only that the obscurity of the town was, both by Nathanael and the Jews, contrasted with our Lord’s claims. (3) The Nazarites of old were men holy and consecrated to God; e.g. Samson ( Jdg 13:5 ), Samuel ( 1Sa 1:11 ), and to this the words are referred by Tert [14] , Jerome, Erasm., Beza, Calvin, Grot., Wets [15] ., a [16] . But ( ) our Lord did not (like John the Baptist) lead a life in accordance with the Nazarite vow, but drank wine, &c., and set himself in marked contrast with John in this very particular (ch. Mat 11:18-19 ); and ( ) the word for Nazarite is (Jdg 13:5 [17] ), or (ib. and Mat 16:18 [18] , Lam 4:7 ), whereas this, denoting an inhabitant of Nazareth , is always in the N.T., except in Mark (Mar 1:24 ; Mar 10:47 ; Mar 14:67 ; Mar 16:6 ), and Luk 4:43 (Luk 18:37 ; Luk 24:19 v. r.), where it is . (4) There may be an allusion to , a branch, by which name our Lord is called in Isa 11:1 , and from which word it appears that the name Nazareth is probably derived. So ‘ eruditi Hebri ,’ in Jerome on Isa 11:1 , and Pisc., Casaub., Fritz., De Wette, &c. But this word is only used in the place cited; and in by far the more precise prophecies of the Branch, Zec 3:8 ; Zec 6:12 ; Jer 23:5 ; Jer 33:15 , and Isa 4:2 , the word is used. I leave it, therefore, as an unsolved difficulty.

[14] Tertullian , 200

[15] Wetstein.

[16] alii = some cursive mss.

[17] The CODEX VATICANUS, No. 1209 in the Vatican Library at Rome; and proved, by the old catalogues, to have been there from the foundation of the library in the 16th century. It was apparently, from internal evidence, copied in Egypt. It is on vellum, and contains the Old and New Testaments. In the latter, it is deficient from Heb 9:14 to the end of the Epistle; it does not contain the Epistles to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon; nor the Apocalypse. An edition of this celebrated codex, undertaken as long ago as 1828 by Cardinal Angelo Mai, has since his death been published at Rome. The defects of this edition are such, that it can hardly be ranked higher in usefulness than a tolerably complete collation, entirely untrustworthy in those places where it differs from former collations in representing the MS. as agreeing with the received text. An 8vo edition of the N.T. portion, newly revised by Vercellone, was published at Rome in 1859 (referred to as ‘Verc’): and of course superseded the English reprint of the 1st edition. Even in this 2nd edition there were imperfections which rendered it necessary to have recourse to the MS. itself, and to the partial collations made in former times. These are (1) that of Bartolocci (under the name of Giulio de St. Anastasia), once librarian at the Vatican, made in 1669, and preserved in manuscript in the Imperial Library (MSS. Gr. Suppl. 53) at Paris (referred to as ‘Blc’); (2) that of Birch (‘Bch’), published in various readings to the Acts and Epistles, Copenhagen, 1798, Apocalypse, 1800, Gospels, 1801; (3) that made for the great Bentley (‘Btly’), by the Abbate Mico, published in Ford’s Appendix to Woide’s edition of the Codex Alexandrinus, 1799 (it was made on the margin of a copy of Cephalus’ Greek Testament, Argentorati, 1524, still amongst Bentley’s books in the Library of Trinity College, Cambridge); (4) notes of alterations by the original scribe and other correctors. These notes were procured for Bentley by the Abb de Stosch, and were till lately supposed to be lost. They were made by the Abbate Rulotta (‘Rl’), and are preserved amongst Bentley’s papers in the Library of Trinity College, Cambridge (B. 17. 20) 1 . The Codex has been occasionally consulted for the verification of certain readings by Tregelles, Tischendorf, and others. A list of readings examined at Rome by the present editor (Feb. 1861), and by the Rev. E. C. Cure, Fellow of Merton College, Oxford (April 1862), will be found at the end of these prolegomena. A description, with an engraving from a photograph of a portion of a page, is given in Burgon’s “Letters from Rome,” London 1861. This most important MS. was probably written in the fourth century (Hug, Tischendorf, al.).

[18] The MS. referred to by this symbol is that commonly called the Alexandrine, or CODEX ALEXANDRINUS. It once belonged to Cyrillus Lucaris, patriarch of Alexandria and then of Constantinople, who in the year 1628 presented it to our King Charles I. It is now in the British Museum. It is on parchment in four volumes, of which three contain the Old, and one the New Testament, with the Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians. This fourth volume is exhibited open in a glass case. It will be seen by the letters in the inner margin of this edition, that the first 24 chapters of Matthew are wanting in it, its first leaf commencing , ch. Mat 25:6 : as also the leaves containing , Joh 6:50 , to , Joh 8:52 . It is generally agreed that it was written at Alexandria; it does not, however, in the Gospels , represent that commonly known as the Alexandrine text, but approaches much more nearly to the Constantinopolitan, or generally received text. The New Testament, according to its text, was edited, in uncial types cast to imitate those of the MS., by Woide, London, 1786, the Old Testament by Baber, London, 1819: and its N.T. text has now been edited in common type by Mr. B. H. Cowper, London, 1861. The date of this MS. has been variously assigned, but it is now pretty generally agreed to be the fifth century .

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

Mat 2:23 . . in Sept [11] is used regularly for in the sense of to dwell, and with in Luke and Acts (Luk 13:4 ; Act 1:20 , etc.) in the same sense. Here with it seems to mean going to settle in, adopting as a home, the district of Galilee, the particular town called Nazareth. is to be taken along with . not with . Arrived in Galilee he transferred his family to Nazareth, as afterwards Jesus migrated to Capernaum to carry on there His ministry (Mat 4:13 , where the same form of expression recurs). , a town in lower Galilee, in the tribe of Zebulon, nowhere mentioned in O. T. or Josephus. , etc.: a final prophetic reference winding up the history of the infancy. not , as usual, but with much the same meaning. It does not necessarily imply that a prophetic oracle consciously influenced Joseph in making his choice, but only that the evangelist saw in that choice a fulfilment of prophecy. But what prophecy? The reference is vague, not to any particular prophet, but to the prophets in general. In no one place can any such statement be found. Some have suggested that it occurred in some prophetic book or oracle no longer extant. “Don’t ask,” says Euthy. Zig., “in what prophets; you will not find: many prophetic books were lost” (after Chrys.). Olearius, in an elaborate note, while not adopting, states with evident sympathy this view as held by others. Jerome, following the Jewish scholars (eruditi Hebraeorum) of his time, believed the reference to be mainly to Isa 11 , where mention is made of a branch ( ) that shall spring out of Jesse’s root. This view is accepted by most modern scholars, Catholic and Protestant, the name of the town being viewed as a derivative from the Hebrew word (a feminine form). The epithet will thus mean: “the man of Nazareth, the town of the off-shoot”. De Wette says: “In the spirit of the exegetical mysticism of the time, and applying what the Jews called Midrasch , deeper investigation, the word is used in a double sense in allusion at once to , Isa 11:1 , sprout , and to the name of Nazareth”. There may be something in the suggestion that the reference is to Jdg 13:7 : , and the idea: one living apart in a secluded town. (So Furrer in Die Bedeutung der bibl. Geographie fr d. bib. Exegese , p. 15.)

[11] Septuagint.

This final prophetic reference in the history of the infancy is the weakest link in the chain. It is wasted effort to try to show its value in the prophetic argument. Instead of doing this, apologists would act more wisely by frankly recognising the weakness, and drawing from it an argument in favour of historicity. This may very legitimately be done. Of all the incidents mentioned in this chapter, the settlement in Nazareth is the only one we have other means of verifying. Whether it was the original or the adopted home of Jesus may be doubtful, but from many references in the Gospels we know that it was His home from childhood till manhood. In this case, therefore, we certainly know that the historic fact suggested the prophetic reference, instead of the prophecy creating the history. And the very weakness of the prophetic reference in this instance raises a presumption that that was the nature of the connection between prophecy and history throughout. It is a caveat against the critical theory that in the second chapter of Matthew we have an imaginary history of the infancy of Jesus, compiled to meet a craving for knowledge on the subject, and adapted to the requirements of faith, the rudiments of the story consisting of a collection of Messianic prophecies the star of Jacob, princes bringing gifts, Rachel weeping for her children, etc. The last of the prophetic references would never have occurred to any one, whether the evangelist or any other unknown source of the tradition, unless there had been a fact going before, the settlement in Nazareth. But given the fact, there was a strong desire to find some allusion to it in the O. T. Faith was easily satisfied; the faintest allusion or hint would do. That was in this ease, and presumably in most cases of the kind, the problem with which the Christian mind in the Apostolic age was occupied: not creating history, but discovering in evangelic facts even the most minute, prophetic fulfilments. The evangelist’s idea of fulfilment may provoke a smile, but it might also awaken a feeling of thankfulness in view of what has been stated. It is with the prophetic references in the Gospels as with songs without words. The composer has a certain scene or state of mind in his view, and writes under its inspiration. But you are not in his secret, and cannot tell when you hear the music what it means. But let the key be given, and immediately you find new meaning in the music. The prophecies are the music; the key is the history. Given the prophecies alone and you could with difficulty imagine the history; given the history you can easily understand how religious fancy might discover corresponding prophecies. That the prophecies, once suggested, might react on the facts and lead to legendary modifications is of course not to be denied.

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

dwelt = settled.

in. Greek. eis.

Nazareth. His former residence. App-169. TheAramaic name. See App-94. See note on verses: Mat 2:1, Mat 2:11, in, and Luk 2:39.

that = so that.

spoken. It does not say “written”. It is not “an unsolved difficulty”, as alleged. The prophecy had been uttered by more than one prophet; therefore the reference to the Hebrew nezer ( = a branch) is useless, as it is used of Christ only by Isaiah (Isa 11:1; Isa 60:21), and it was “spoken” by “the prophets” (plural) Note the Figure of speech Hysteresis. App-6.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

23. ] These words refer to the divine purpose in the event, not to that of Joseph in bringing it about.

. . .] These words are no where verbatim to be found, nor is this asserted by the Evangelist; but that the sense of the prophets is such. In searching for such sense, the following hypotheses have been made-none of them satisfactory:-(1) Euthymius says, , , , , . So also Chrys., Theophyl., Le Clerc, &c. But the expression . . seems to have a wider bearing than is thus implied. (2) The general sense of the prophets is, that Christ should be a despised person, as the inhabitants of Nazareth were (Joh 1:47). So Michaelis, Paulus, Rosenm., Kuin., Olsh., &c. But surely this part of the Messiahs prophetic character is not general or prominent enough, in the absence of any direct verbal connexion with the word in our text, to found such an interpretation on: nor, on the other hand, does it appear that an inhabitant of Nazareth, as such, was despised; only that the obscurity of the town was, both by Nathanael and the Jews, contrasted with our Lords claims. (3) The Nazarites of old were men holy and consecrated to God; e.g. Samson (Jdg 13:5), Samuel (1Sa 1:11), and to this the words are referred by Tert[14], Jerome, Erasm., Beza, Calvin, Grot., Wets[15]., a[16]. But () our Lord did not (like John the Baptist) lead a life in accordance with the Nazarite vow, but drank wine, &c., and set himself in marked contrast with John in this very particular (ch. Mat 11:18-19); and () the word for Nazarite is (Jdg 13:5 [17]), or (ib. and Mat 16:18 [18],-Lam 4:7), whereas this, denoting an inhabitant of Nazareth, is always in the N.T., except in Mark (Mar 1:24; Mar 10:47; Mar 14:67; Mar 16:6), and Luk 4:43 (Luk 18:37; Luk 24:19 v. r.), where it is . (4) There may be an allusion to , a branch, by which name our Lord is called in Isa 11:1, and from which word it appears that the name Nazareth is probably derived. So eruditi Hebri, in Jerome on Isa 11:1, and Pisc., Casaub., Fritz., De Wette, &c. But this word is only used in the place cited; and in by far the more precise prophecies of the Branch, Zec 3:8; Zec 6:12; Jer 23:5; Jer 33:15, and Isa 4:2, the word is used. I leave it, therefore, as an unsolved difficulty.

[14] Tertullian, 200

[15] Wetstein.

[16] alii = some cursive mss.

[17] The CODEX VATICANUS, No. 1209 in the Vatican Library at Rome; and proved, by the old catalogues, to have been there from the foundation of the library in the 16th century. It was apparently, from internal evidence, copied in Egypt. It is on vellum, and contains the Old and New Testaments. In the latter, it is deficient from Heb 9:14 to the end of the Epistle;-it does not contain the Epistles to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon;-nor the Apocalypse. An edition of this celebrated codex, undertaken as long ago as 1828 by Cardinal Angelo Mai, has since his death been published at Rome. The defects of this edition are such, that it can hardly be ranked higher in usefulness than a tolerably complete collation, entirely untrustworthy in those places where it differs from former collations in representing the MS. as agreeing with the received text. An 8vo edition of the N.T. portion, newly revised by Vercellone, was published at Rome in 1859 (referred to as Verc): and of course superseded the English reprint of the 1st edition. Even in this 2nd edition there were imperfections which rendered it necessary to have recourse to the MS. itself, and to the partial collations made in former times. These are-(1) that of Bartolocci (under the name of Giulio de St. Anastasia), once librarian at the Vatican, made in 1669, and preserved in manuscript in the Imperial Library (MSS. Gr. Suppl. 53) at Paris (referred to as Blc); (2) that of Birch (Bch), published in various readings to the Acts and Epistles, Copenhagen, 1798,-Apocalypse, 1800,-Gospels, 1801; (3) that made for the great Bentley (Btly), by the Abbate Mico,-published in Fords Appendix to Woides edition of the Codex Alexandrinus, 1799 (it was made on the margin of a copy of Cephalus Greek Testament, Argentorati, 1524, still amongst Bentleys books in the Library of Trinity College, Cambridge); (4) notes of alterations by the original scribe and other correctors. These notes were procured for Bentley by the Abb de Stosch, and were till lately supposed to be lost. They were made by the Abbate Rulotta (Rl), and are preserved amongst Bentleys papers in the Library of Trinity College, Cambridge (B. 17. 20)1. The Codex has been occasionally consulted for the verification of certain readings by Tregelles, Tischendorf, and others. A list of readings examined at Rome by the present editor (Feb. 1861), and by the Rev. E. C. Cure, Fellow of Merton College, Oxford (April 1862), will be found at the end of these prolegomena. A description, with an engraving from a photograph of a portion of a page, is given in Burgons Letters from Rome, London 1861. This most important MS. was probably written in the fourth century (Hug, Tischendorf, al.).

[18] The MS. referred to by this symbol is that commonly called the Alexandrine, or CODEX ALEXANDRINUS. It once belonged to Cyrillus Lucaris, patriarch of Alexandria and then of Constantinople, who in the year 1628 presented it to our King Charles I. It is now in the British Museum. It is on parchment in four volumes, of which three contain the Old, and one the New Testament, with the Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians. This fourth volume is exhibited open in a glass case. It will be seen by the letters in the inner margin of this edition, that the first 24 chapters of Matthew are wanting in it, its first leaf commencing , ch. Mat 25:6 :-as also the leaves containing , Joh 6:50,-to , Joh 8:52. It is generally agreed that it was written at Alexandria;-it does not, however, in the Gospels, represent that commonly known as the Alexandrine text, but approaches much more nearly to the Constantinopolitan, or generally received text. The New Testament, according to its text, was edited, in uncial types cast to imitate those of the MS., by Woide, London, 1786, the Old Testament by Baber, London, 1819: and its N.T. text has now been edited in common type by Mr. B. H. Cowper, London, 1861. The date of this MS. has been variously assigned, but it is now pretty generally agreed to be the fifth century.

Fuente: The Greek Testament

Mat 2:23. , he came to and took up his abode at) [E. V., he came and dwelt at], i.e., he came to dwell at, or he dwelt at. The same mode of expression occurs at ch. Mat 4:13. Thus, IN Gen 13:18, the LXX. have , he came and dwelt by the oak.-, Nazareth) In Hebrew, . The final is rendered in Greek by T.-, a Nazarene) Our Lord spent His private life-that is, by far the greatest portion of His years-in the town of Nazareth, from whence the surname of Nazarene was given to Him in the common speech of men, whether devoted or hostile to Him, and in the title on the cross. This is what the prophecy here cited by St Matthew had long ago intimated. Some seek for the whole force of this prediction in an allegorical interpretation of the etymology of the word Nazareth; and this indeed should clearly be sought for in , a diadem, etc., not from , to keep or hide,[105] which Jewish animosity employs maliciously; for the Hebrew (Tzade) is always rendered by the Greek (Sigma), whereas the Greek (Zeta) universally corresponds to the Hebrew (Zayin), as it does also in the word . This rule is universal, which no one can rightly oppose without bringing forward examples to the contrary. Consider what the sound and learned Hiller says on this subject, Syntagm. hermen. p. 347, etc., and Onom. Sacr., pp. 695, 701, 893; and compare his remarks with I. H., a Seelen,[106] medit. exeg., p. 632. This belongs to the etymology of the name Nazareth; it does not, however, establish the allegory. For neither is there any reason why we should ascribe the character of a Levitical Nazarite to Christ (see Mat 11:19), nor why we should think that the scope of the prophecy is exhausted by any signification of the word NZR, .

[105] See Pro 7:10, where a harlot is spoken of as , subtle of heart.-(I. B.)

[106] JOHN HENRY A SEELEN, an historian and philologist of the Academy of Lubeck, born in the year 1688. He published his Meditationes Exegetic at Lubeck, 1732.-(I. B.)

It was predicted by Micah, that Christ should go forth from Bethlehem: Bethlehem, , signifies house of bread, and Christ is the Bread of Life. But who would have said that the prophecy of Micah was fulfilled by Christ being the bread of life? We know that the town where Christ was born was intended by the prophecy; in like manner, the town where He grew up; and the common surname which thence arose was indicated by the prediction, , He shall be called a Nazarene: and therefore the particle [107] is prefixed by the evangelist, as is the custom in citing testimonies. Although at what time that prophet flourished by whom this prediction was uttered; whether the town of Nazareth, of which no other mention occurs in the Old Testament, was then of any account or not; whether that prophet was himself a Nazarene, and deposited this remarkable verse at Nazareth, or whether he left it to posterity, conveyed by word of mouth alone, or also committed to writing,[108] whence St Matthew obtained it, who knows? what signifies it to know? In heaven, some stars illumine either hemisphere, some both, some have various risings and settings; on earth, rivers sometimes withdraw themselves from the sight of men, until by hidden ways they reach the place where they again burst forth. Thus the Divine Oracles are dispensed with admirable variety; a singular example of which is afforded by the passage in St John, concerning the three who bear witness in heaven, of which the Eastern Church was for many ages in ignorance, whilst the Western and African Churches maintained it always, though not everywhere. This prediction, indeed, He shall be called a Nazarene, was not known or understood by most persons; otherwise Galilee and Nazareth itself would not have been so much despised (see Joh 1:47; Joh 7:52). And, rightly, many have long since denied that this verse exists in the Scriptures of the Old Testament. Its condition, therefore, is the same as that of the prophecy of Enoch, introduced at length by St Jude into the Scriptures of the New Testament, and thus stamped with the seal of inspiration; the same as that of the apothegm, which, though delivered by our Lord, does not occur in the Gospels, but is quoted by the mouth of St Paul, and the pen of St Luke, Act 20:35. Nor have the Jews any ground of accusation, because anything is quoted in the New Testament which does not exist in the Old; for they relate many ancient things which equally are not to be found there. Where lay hid the Proverbs of Solomon from ch. Mat 25:1; the prophecy of Azariah (2Ch 15:2, etc.); the epistle of Elijah (2Ch 21:12), until they were inserted in the books of the Old Testament, many ages after they were delivered? Certainly, there was no sufficient reason why St Matthew should frame[109] this, if it had been a perfect novelty in his own time. By such a proceeding, he would have more injured than advantaged the whole Christian cause. He had sufficiently numerous examples of prophecies fulfilled in Jesus of Nazareth without this. Those who interpret this important verse more vaguely, so as to make out that it is contained here or there in the Scriptures of the Old Testament, in truth take away one from the ancient prophecies; whereas those who consider (that which was uttered), He shall he called a Nazarene, to have been expressly uttered of old, recognise a homogeneous portion of the entire testimony of prophecy, and thus in truth maintain the integrity and defend the simplicity of Scripture (Cf. Caloviuss Biblia Illustrata, and Russ[110] Harmonia Evangelistarum, p. 284). WHO was to have the surname of Nazarene, is not added in the verse: for wherever anything occurs in the prophecies which is not foreign to the Messiah, that should be understood of the Messiah, although there be no express mention of His name. It is, however, probable that more words than these two may have existed together with them in a very short prediction. The long concealment of this monument of antiquity was agreeable to the manner of Christs private life, spent in the retirement of Nazareth, and calculated to try the faith of saints, and condemn the falsehood of sinners. (See Joh 1:46, etc., and Joh 7:41, etc.)

[107] The literal meaning of is that; but in cases like the present it has, by the Greek idiom, merely the force which inverted commas have in English.-(I. B.)

[108] For the prophets have uttered many things which were not inserted in their public writings.-B. G. V.

[109] i.e., It would serve no purpose to insert this prediction, if it had been a mere figment.-(I. B.)

[110] JOHN REINHARD RUS, a learned Lutheran divine of the eighteenth century. The title of the work is Harmonia Evangelistarum, ita adornata, ut investigat, sedul textus cohrenti, nullus versus, sive trajiciatur, sive prtereatur sine brevi ac succinct explicatione, qu justi commentarii loco esse queat. Jen 1727-1730.-(I. B.)

Now that we have proved that the peculiar and primary force of the name Nazarene, is to be found in the town itself of Nazareth, we proceed to lay down as a corollary, that the etymology of the country, and surname of Christ thence derived, is not unimportant. Christ, the Son of David the Bethlehemite, was not called a Bethlehemite: therefore, in the etymology of the town of Bethlehem, a mystery is not equally sought for. Christ was called a Nazarene. This was indeed effected by the discourse of men; but not without the overruling providence of God. It was not by mere accident that Pilate inscribed categorically, in the three cardinal languages, Jesus, King of the Jews, and retained what he had written: it did not by mere accident happen that Pilate at the same time inscribed THE NAZARENE, and that others, both before and after, used the expression with reference to our Lord. The names, JESUS, CHRIST, EMMANUEL, etc., intimate, that that which is implied by their sound is actually being exhibited: you would rightly deny that the surname, Nazarene, alone should be without a mystical meaning:, a diadem, is the token of a kings head, and is, according to Hiller, a town which crowns the summit of a mountain; the name, therefore, of Nazarene, may thus be expressed in German, ZU CRONBERG HAT DER GECRONTE GEWOHNET,-The crowned one hath dwelt on the summit of a hill.-See Psa 132:18. The names of places are frequently put for the thing itself which is signified: we pass by the Veronenses, Placentini, Laudiceni, of the Latins. The meaning of Scripture is deeper: Simon the Canaanite was also called Zelotes, both from his country and his distinguishing virtue.-See Mat 10:4, and Luk 6:15. See especially Isa 63:1.[111]

[111] Bengel, J. A. (1860). Vol. 1: Gnomon of the New Testament (M. E. Bengel & J. C. F. Steudel, Ed.) (J. Bandinel & A. R. Fausset, Trans.) (81-138). Edinburgh: T&T Clark.

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

He shall be called

Probably referring to Isa 11:1 where Christ is spoken of as “a netzer (or, ‘rod’) out of the stem of Jesse.”

Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes

Nazareth: Joh 18:5, Joh 18:7, Joh 19:19, Act 2:22

He shall: Mat 26:71, Num 6:13, Jdg 13:5, 1Sa 1:11, Psa 69:9, Psa 69:10, Isa 53:1, Isa 53:2, Amo 2:10-12, Joh 1:45, Joh 1:46, Act 24:5

Reciprocal: Mat 1:22 – that Mat 2:15 – that Mat 4:14 – it Mat 8:17 – it might Mat 13:54 – when Mat 21:11 – of Nazareth Mat 26:69 – Jesus Mar 10:47 – Jesus Mar 14:67 – Jesus Luk 1:26 – a city Luk 2:4 – of the city Luk 2:39 – they returned Luk 4:16 – to Luk 18:37 – Jesus Joh 7:28 – Ye both Act 22:8 – I am

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

2:23

Verse 23. The city to which Joseph went with his family was Nazareth. which was the former home of Mary (Luk 1:26-27). This seems to have been a mere coincidence for them to settle at this place, but we may “be sure that God had a hand In all of the affair. The writer says it was in fulfillment of a prophecy that He was to be called a Nazarene. The last word is not in any prophecy of the Old Testament. The term is derived from the formation of the name Nazareth which seems to signify “a sprout or branch,” and under such like terms Jesus is referred to in Isa 11:1; Isa 63:2; Jer 23:5; Jer 33:15; Zec 3:8; Zec 6:12.

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene.

[He shall be called a Nazarene.] Those things which are brought from Isa 11:1 concerning Netzer, the Branch; and those things also produced concerning Samson the Nazarite, a most noble type of Christ, have their weight, by no means to be despised. We add, that Matthew may be understood concerning the outward, humble, and mean condition of our Saviour. And that by the word, Nazarene; he hints his separation and estrangement from other men, as a despicable person, and unworthy of the society of men.

I. Let it be observed, that the evangelist does not cite some one of the prophets, but all: “spoken by the prophets.” But now all the prophets, in a manner, do preach the vile and abject condition of Christ; none, that his original should be out of Nazareth.

II. David, in his person, speaks thus; I was a stranger to my brethren; Psa 69:9.

III. If you derive the word Nazarene; which not a few do, from Nazir; a Nazirean; that word denotes not only a separation; dedicated to God, such as that of the Nazarenes was; but it signifies also the separation of a man from others, as being unworthy of their society; Gen 49:26; “They shall be on the head of Joseph, and on the crown of the head of him that was separate from his brethren.”

Therefore, let us digest the sense of the evangelist by this paraphrase: Joseph was to depart with Christ to Beth-lehem, the city of David, or to Jerusalem, the royal city, had not the fear of Archelaus hindered him. Therefore, by the signification of an angel, he is sent away into Galilee, a very contemptible country, and into the city Nazareth, a place of no account: whence, from this very place, and the name of it, you may observe that fulfilled to a tittle which is so often declared by the prophets, that the Messias should be Nazor; a stranger; or separate from men, as if he were a very vile person, and not worthy of their company.

Fuente: Lightfoot Commentary Gospels

Mat 2:23. It does not follow that Matthew was not aware of the previous residence of Joseph in Nazareth. There is no contradiction between his statements and those of Luke. Each mentions those facts most important for his special purpose. Matthews narrative is not a biography, but brings up facts to prove the fulfilment of prophecy. He reserves the mention of Nazareth until he can say: that it might be fulfilled, etc. Nor was it strange that Joseph, though previously a resident of Galilee, should at first seek to return to Judea. The revelations made to him would suggest Bethlehem as the proper place to train this child. He naturally supposed that He who was of the tribe of Judah should dwell in the land of Judah, the most religious, most sacred part of Palestine; and, as the promised Messiah, should be brought as near as possible to the theocratic centre, where He might have frequent intercourse with the priests and rabbins, and be educated under the very shadow of the temple. Only through a special command of God, was he led to return with Jesus to Galilee; and that he made his abode in the obscure vale of Nazareth, can only be explained by the fact, of which Matthew is wholly silent, that this had been his earlier residence, as related by Luke. (Andrews.) All difficulties are met, if we suppose that when Joseph and Mary left Nazareth at the time of the census, they intended to settle at Bethlehem, which they would regard as the most suitable place of residence for the expected child, the infant Messiah.

A city called Nazareth. Implying the comparative obscurity of the place. It is situated on the northern edge of the great central plain of Jezreel or Esdraelon, into which it opens through a narrow pass in the wall of hills by which it is surrounded. The name Nazareth, seems to be an Aramaic form of a Hebrew word, meaning a shoot or twig, and applied by Isaiah (Isa 11:1) to the Messiah as a shoot from the prostrate trunk or stem of Jesse, i.e., to his birth from the royal family of Judah in its humble and reduced estate. This coincidence of name, as well as the obscurity of Nazareth itself and the general contempt for Galilee at large, established an association between our Lords humiliation and his residence at this place, so that various predictions of his low condition were fulfilled in being called a Nazarene. (J. A. Alexander.)

That it might be fulfilled. God so willed it, irrespective of Josephs design of settling there.

Prophets. Indefinite, because what follows is a summing up of the sense of a number of prophetic allusions.

That he should be called a Nazarene. He was thus called, as an inhabitant of Nazareth (comp. Act 24:6 : sect of the Nazarenes); but no prophet uses these words or applies this name to the Messiah. It cannot be a quotation from a lost or apocryphal book, nor is the term identical with Nazarite. The various allusions to the despised and humble appearance of the Messiah are, so to speak, concentrated in that of Nezer. The prophets applied to Him the term branch or bush, in reference to his insignificance in the eyes of the world; and this appellation was specially verified, when He appeared as an inhabitant of despised Nazareth, the town of shrubs. (Lange.)

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

A threefold interpretation is given of these words, He shall be called a Nazarene.

Some read the words, 1. He shall be called a Nazarite. The Nazarites were a religious and separate rank of persons among the Jews, who abstained from wine, and came not near the dead, for fear of pollution. Christ was a holy person, but no Nazarite, in a strict sense; for he drank wine, and touched the dead.

2. Others read the words, He shall be called a Netzer, a branch, in allusion to Isa 11:1 where he is called a branch of the root of Jesse. Christ was that true branch of which the prophets had so often spoken.

3. Others will will have the word Nazarene refer to the city of Nazareth, where Christ was conceived, and lived most of his time, He shall be called a Nazarene, because he dwelt at Nazareth.

Hence his disciples were called the sect of the Nazarenes; that is, the followers of him that dwelt at Nazareth; and Christ himself is pleased to own the title, I am Jesus of Nazareth, whom thou persecutest. Act 22:8

Learn from hence, The great humility of mind that was found in our Savior. He was born at Bethlehem, a little city; he lived at Nazareth, a poor, contemptible place: he aspired not after the grandeur of the world, but was meek and lowly in spirit.

May the same humble mind be in us which was also in Christ Jesus!

Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament

Mat 2:23. He dwelt in a city called Nazareth Where he had formerly resided before he went to Bethlehem. Nazareth, as appears from Luk 4:29, was built upon a rock, not far from mount Tabor. The country about it, according to Antoninus the martyr, was like a paradise, abounding in wheat and fruits of all kinds. Wine, oil, and honey, of the best kind, were produced there: but it was a place so very contemptible among the Jews, that it was grown into a proverb with them, That no good thing could be expected from thence; so that by Jesuss returning to Nazareth, and being brought up and educated in it, a way was further opened by the providence of God, for the fulfilment of the many Scriptures which foretold that he should appear in mean and despicable circumstances, and be set up as a mark of public contempt and reproach. This seems to be the most probable solution of this difficult text. He shall be called a Nazarene That is, he shall be reputed vile and abject, and shall be despised and rejected of men, an event which many of the prophets had particularly foretold. And it is to be observed, that St. Matthew does not cite any particular prophet for these words, as he had done before, Mat 1:22; and here, Mat 2:15; Mat 2:17, and in other places, but only says, this was spoken by the prophets, viz., in general, whereby, as Jerome observes, he shows that he took not the words from the prophets, but only the sense. See Psa 69:9-10; Isa 53:3. Now it is certain the Nazarene was a term of contempt and infamy put upon Christ, both by the unbelieving Jews and Gentiles, and that because he was supposed to come out of this very city. There was, among the Jews, a celebrated thief, called Ben-Nezer, and in allusion to him, they gave the name to Christ. His very going to dwell at Nazareth, was an occasion of his being despised and rejected by the Jews. Thus, when Philip said to Nathanael, We have found Jesus of Nazareth, of whom Moses spake, Nathanael answered, Can any good thing come out of Nazareth? And when Nicodemus seemed to favour him, the rest of the council said to him, Search and look, for out of Galilee ariseth no prophet. Here then we have a plain sense of these words. He was sent to this contemptible place that he might there have a name of infamy and contempt put upon him, according to the frequent intimations of the prophets. If, after all, this interpretation is not acquiesced in, we may, with many of the ancient Christians, particularly Chrysostom, suppose, that the evangelist may refer to some writings of the prophets, which were then extant, but are now lost, or to some writings not put into the Sacred Canon, or to some paraphrases upon the writings. As to the interpretations which refer this to Christs being called Netzer, the Branch, Isa 11:1; Jer 23:5; or Nazir, one Separated, or, the Holy One, they all fail in this, that they give no account how this was fulfilled by Christs living at Nazareth, he being as much the Branch, the Holy One, when he was born at Bethlehem, and before he went to Nazareth, as after.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Verse 23

A Nazarene; a proverbial term for one despised; because Nazareth an obscure and insignificant village. Thus Jesus, being of royal lineage, was a child of very high birth, but yet of very humble circumstances. In this twofold aspect of the Savior’s worldly condition there may be a design to teach us, on the one hand, not to set too high a value upon the worldly advantages of wealth, rank, and station, and, on the other, not wholly to despise them.

Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament