Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Matthew 2:4
And when he had gathered all the chief priests and scribes of the people together, he demanded of them where Christ should be born.
4. gathered all the chief priests and scribes of the people together ] i. e. summoned a meeting of the Sanhedrin, a body often indicated in this way. Others contend that this was an irregular meeting of all the chief priests and learned men.
The chief priests were those who had served the office of high priest, and also the heads of the courses into which the priests were divided. Scribes were those who transcribed or copied the law and who expounded it. They are called lawyers in St Luke’s gospel.
where Christ should be born ] Lit. where the Christ or Messiah is born. Where do your sacred writings represent him to be born? For a similar use of the indicative cp. Joh 7:52.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
The chief priests – By the chief priests here are meant not only the high priest and his deputy, but. also the heads or chiefs of the 24 classes into which David had divided the sacerdotal families, 1Ch 23:6; 24; 2Ch 8:14; Ezr 8:24.
Scribes – By the scribes, in the New Testament, are meant learned men; men skilled in the law, or the lawyers of the nation. They kept the records of the Courts of justice, the registers of the synagogues, wrote articles of contract and sale, bills of divorce, etc. They were also called lawyers, Mat 22:35, and doctors of the law, Luk 5:17. They were called scribes. from the fact of their writing the public records. They were not, however, a religious sect, but might be either Pharisees or Sadducees. By the chief priests and scribes here mentioned is denoted the Sanhedrin or great council of the nation. This was composed of 72 men, who had the charge of the civil and religious affairs of the Jews. On this occasion Herod, in alarm, called them together, professedly to make inquiry respecting the birth of the Messiah.
Demanded of them – Inquired, or asked of them. As they were the learned men of the nation, and as it was their business to study and explain the Old Testament, they were presumed to know what the prophecies had declared on that point. His object was to ascertain from prophecy where he was born, that he might put him to death, and thus calm the anxieties of his own mind. He seems not to have had any doubt about the time when he would be born. He was satisfied that the time had come.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Mat 2:4
Priests and scribes.
Near in privilege, far from piety
Some that are best acquainted with the gospel are practical strangers to it. They are like one who should pore over a map, mastering its geography; marking each sea, lake, river; understanding the position of every range of mountains; learning the names of all the localities indicated, but never visiting them. A living author, describing his journey to the falls of Niagara, says: I met with a gentleman who told me that he had walked from Boston, a distance of seven hundred miles, to see Niagara. When within seven miles, he heard what he thought might be the roar of the torrent, and asked a man who was at work on the road if this was so. The man replied that he didnt know; it might be, but he had never been there himself. Yet he had lived within sound of it all his life! Wonderful stupidity, this! Who does not reprobate such folly? Nevertheless, it is nothing-absolutely nothing-compared with the direr folly which may be witnessed any day that we choose to look around us. Numbers are within sound of the river of the water of life without an actual, personal experience of its benefit. (Rev. T. R. Stevenson.)
Like in this to those who built the ark for Noah, providing others with a refuge, themselves perished in the flood; or like to the stones by the road that show the miles, but themselves are not able to move. (Augustine.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 4. The chief priests] Not only the high priest for the time being, called cohen ha-rosh, 2Kg 25:18, and his deputy, called cohen mishneh, with those who had formerly borne the high priest’s office; but also, the chiefs or heads of the twenty four sacerdotal families, which David distributed into so many courses, 1Ch 24. These latter are styled sarey ha-cohanim, chief of the priests, 2Ch 36:14; Ezr 8:24; and roshey ha-cohanim, heads of the priests, Ne 12:7. Josephus calls them by the same name as the writers of the New Testament. In his Life, sect. 8, he mentions – , MANY of the chief priests. The word is used in the singular in this last sense, for a chief of the priests, Ac 19:14.
Scribes] The word , in the Septuagint, is used for a political officer, whose business it was to assist kings and civil magistrates, and to keep an account in writing of public acts and occurrences. Such an officer is called in Hebrew seper hamelech, , the king’s scribe, or secretary. See LXX. 2Kg 12:10.
The word is often used by the LXX. for a man of learning, especially for one skilled in the Mosaic law: and, in the same sense, it is used by the New Testament writers. is therefore to be understood as always implying a man of letters, or learning, capable of instructing the people. The derivation of the names proves this to be the genuine meaning of the word : a letter, or character, in writing: or , letters, learning, erudition, and especially that gained from books. The Hebrew or sopher, from saphar, to tell, count, cypher, signifies both a book, volume, roll, c., and a notary, recorder, or historian and always signifies a man of learning. We often term such a person a man of letters.
The word is used Ac 19:35, for a civil magistrate at Ephesus, probably such a one as we would term recorder. It appears that Herod at this time gathered the whole Sanhedrin, in order to get the fullest information on a subject by which all his jealous fears had been alarmed.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
In this perplexity the king Herod calleth a synod or convocation, which was made up of the chief priests and scribes; the single question which he propounds to them was to resolve him
where Christ should be born. It is most likely this was an extraordinary convention of such of these persons as the king thought fit, who were best skilled in the law, and other revelations of holy writ, not any orderly meeting of the sanhedrim; for the question propounded to them was of mere ecclesiastical concern, and to be resolved from the prophecies and writings of the Old Testament. The stating of the question to them, not where the King of the Jews, but where Christ should be born, makes it manifest, that although (that we read of) the wise men said nothing of Christ, yet Herod presently conceived that this King of the Jews, that was born, must be the Messiah prophesied of Psa 2:1-12 and in Dan 9:1-27; he therefore desired to know of them the place in which, according to their received tradition, and sense of the prophecies of holy writ, the Messiah whom they expected (that is, Christ) should be born.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
4. And when he had gathered all thechief priests and scribes of the people togetherThe class ofthe “chief priests” included the high priest for the timebeing, together with all who had previously filled this office; forthough the then head of the Aaronic family was the only rightful highpriest, the Romans removed them at pleasure, to make way forcreatures of their own. In this class probably were included also theheads of the four and twenty courses of the priests. The “scribes”were at first merely transcribers of the law and synagogue readers;afterwards interpreters of the law, both civil and religious, and soboth lawyers and divines. The first of these classes, a proportion ofthe second, and “the elders”that is, as LIGHTFOOTthinks, “those elders of the laity that were not of theLevitical tribe”constituted the supreme council of thenation, called the Sanhedrim, the members of which, at theirfull complement, numbered seventy-two. That this was the councilwhich Herod now convened is most probable, from the solemnity of theoccasion; for though the elders are not mentioned, we find a similaromission where all three were certainly meant (compare Mat 26:59;Mat 27:1). As MEYERsays, it was all the theologians of the nation whom Herod convened,because it was a theological response that he wanted.
he demanded of themasthe authorized interpreters of Scripture.
where ChristtheMessiah.
should be bornaccordingto prophecy.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And when he had gathered all the chief priests,…. Here we have an account of Herod’s conduct at this juncture; he calls a council, assembles the sanhedrim, gathers together the more learned persons in the city to consult with them upon this matter,
the chief priests, all of which he gathered together, and which seem to be many; and were not only the then present high priest and his substitutes, but all the principal persons of the priesthood, who were chosen from the rest, into the great sanhedrim, or council: and by
the scribes of the people are meant a sort of letter learned men, whose business it was to keep and write out copies of the law, and other things, for “the people”; they were the fathers of the traditions, and interpreters of the law to them; and therefore are called “the scribes of the people”: as well also, because they were chosen from among the people, from any other tribe, and not from the tribe of Levi, from whom the priests were; so that one seems to design the “clergy”, and the other the laity, in this assembly. The Septuagint render “the officers of the people”, by this same word the scribes, and scribes of the people, in Nu 11:16 Jos 1:10. The learned Dr. Lightfoot x conjectures, that the persons of note, who were present at this time, were Hillell the president of the council, Shammai the vice president, the sons of Betira, Judah and Joshua, Bava ben Buta, Jonathan ben Uzziel, the Chaldee paraphrast, and Simeon the son of Hillell.
He demanded of them, or asked them with authority, as the chief captain did, Ac 21:33 “where Christ”, , the Christ, the Messiah
should be born? that is, where was the place of his birth as fixed in their prophecies, where, accordingly, they believed and expected he would be born. Herod’s pretence, no doubt, in putting this question was, that he might be able to satisfy the wise men of the East about this matter; though the true reason within himself was, that he might know where this new born king was, in order to destroy him.
x Vol. II. p. 111.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
He inquired of them where the Christ should be born ( ‘ ). The prophetic present () is given, the very words of Herod retained by Matthew’s report. The imperfect tense (epunthaneto) suggests that Herod inquired repeatedly, probably of one and another of the leaders gathered together, both Sadducees (chief priests) and Pharisees (scribes). McNeile doubts, like Holtzmann, if Herod actually called together all the Sanhedrin and probably “he could easily ask the question of a single scribe,” because he had begun his reign with a massacre of the Sanhedrin (Josephus, Ant. XIV. ix. 4). But that was thirty years ago and Herod was desperately in earnest to learn what the Jews really expected about the coming of “the Messiah.” Still Herod probably got together not the Sanhedrin since “elders” are not mentioned, but leaders among the chief priests and scribes, not a formal meeting but a free assembly for conference. He had evidently heard of this expected king and he would swallow plenty of pride to be able to compass the defeat of these hopes.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
All the chief priests. We should expect only one chief priest to be mentioned; but the office had become a lucrative one, and frequently changed hands. A rabbit is quoted as saying that the first temple, which stood about four hundred and ten years, had only eighteen high – priests from first to last; while the second temple, which stood four hundred and twenty years, had more than three hundred high – priests. The reference here is not to a meeting of the Sanhedrim, since the elders, who are not mentioned, belonged to this; but to an extraordinary convocation of all the high – priests and learned men. Besides the high – priest in actual office, there might be others who had been this predecessors, and who continued to bear the name, and in part the dignity. It may possibly have included the heads of the twenty – four courses of priests.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “And when he had gathered all the chief priests,” (kai sunagagon pantas tous archlereis) “And (Herod) having assembled all of the chief or administrative priests,” of Jewry in Jerusalem
2) “And scribes of the people together,” (kai grammateis tou laou) “And (all) the scribes of the people.” The scribes were clerks, record keepers, or archives custodians of both the scriptures and religious court decisions of Jewry. If any should know of the anticipated birthplace of the Messiah, of Jesus, it should have been them.
3) “He demanded of them,” (epunthaneto par’ auton) “He inquired from them,” elicited from them, in a firm requiring manner. 4) “Where Christ should be born.” (pou ho Christos gennatai) “Where the Christ is (exists) born,” according to your prophetic and historical records of Judaism.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
4. Having assembled the priests Though deep silence prevailed respecting Christ in the Hall of Herod, yet, as soon as the Magi have thrown out the mention of a King, predictions are remembered, which formerly lay in oblivion. Herod instantly conjectures, that the King, about whom the Magi inquire, is the Messiah whom God had formerly promised, (Dan 9:25.) Here again it appears, that Herod is seriously alarmed, when he puts such earnest inquiries; and no wonder. All tyrants are cowards, and their cruelty produces stronger alarm in their own breasts than in the breasts of others. Herod must have trembled more than others, because he perceived that he was reigning in opposition to God.
This new investigation shows, that the contempt of Christ, before the arrival of the Magi, must have been very deep. At a later period, the scribes and high priests labored with fury to corrupt the whole of the Scripture, that they might not give any countenance to Christ. But on the present occasion they reply honestly out of the Scripture, and for this reason, that Christ and his Gospel have not yet given them uneasiness. And so all ungodly persons find no difficulty in giving their assent to God on general principles; but when the truth of God begins to press them more closely, they throw out the venom of their rebellion.
We have a striking instance of this, in our own day, among the Papists. They freely own, that he is the only-begotten Son of God, clothed with our flesh, and acknowledge the one person of God-man, as subsisting in the two natures. But when we come to the power and office of Christ, a contest immediately breaks out; because they will not consent to take a lower rank, and much less to be reduced to nothing. In a word, so long as wicked men think that it is taking nothing from themselves, they will yield to God and to Scripture some degree of reverence. But when Christ comes into close conflict with ambition, covetousness, pride, misplaced confidence, hypocrisy, and deceit, they immediately forget all modesty, and break out into rage. Let us therefore learn, that the chief cause of blindness in the enemies of truth is to be found in their wicked affections, which change light into darkness.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(4) The chief priests and scribes.The chief priests were probably the heads of the twenty-four courses into which the sons of Aaron were divided (2Ch. 23:8; Luk. 1:5), but the term may have included those who had, though only for a time, held the office of high priest. The scribes were the interpreters of the Law, casuists and collectors of the traditions of the Elders, for the most part Pharisees. The meeting thus convened was not necessarily a formal meeting of the Sanhedrim or Great Council, and may have been only as a Committee of Notables called together for a special purpose. With a characteristic subtlety, as if trying to gauge the strength of their Messianic hopes, Herod acts as if he himself shared them, and asks where the Christ, the expected Messiah, the anointed of the Lord (Psa. 2:2; Psa. 45:7; Psa. 89:20) was to be born.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
4. All the chief priests and scribes The deep alarm of Herod is manifested by the greatness of the convocation he calls. The chief priest was properly but one; but the title is extended to include his deputy and the heads of the twenty-four courses. Scribes The word scribe signifies a writer, and was originally used to designate one of the class in the tribe of Levi who performed the office of secretary, recorder, roll-keeper, or transcriber. Seraiah was scribe or secretary to King David. 2Sa 8:17. Elihoreph and Ahiah were secretaries to King Solomon. 1Ki 4:3. Under Uzziah, king of Judah, Jeil, the scribe, kept the muster-roll of the army. 2Ch 26:11. So Ezra was a ready scribe in the law of Moses. Ezr 7:6.
The scribes of the New Testament belonged to the class of which Ezra was the model. They were transcribers of the text of the Mosaic law, and students and doctors of its principles. They were the same as the lawyers.
A select number of these scribes, as well as of the Pharisees, was associated with the high priests to constitute the Sanhedrim, or supreme legislative body of the Jewish nation.
Where Christ should be born By Christ here is meant not a proper name, but a title the Christ or the Messiah. See note on Mat 1:1. It is a profound, theological question, therefore, which King Herod puts to his spiritual advisers: Where, according to the prophecies of the Old Testament, is the Messiah to be born? In the answer then given by this illustrious body, we have the decision of the Jewish nation on this point. Hence Tacitus, the celebrated Pagan historian, says: “With the masses the opinion was prevalent that it was predicted IN THE BOOKS OF THE PRIESTS, that the East should at that time grow strong.” Which Suetonius, another Pagan Roman, confirms and makes even more pointed: “Through all the East there prevailed an ancient and constant opinion that it was contained in the fates that at that time those arising from Judea should become masters of human things.”
These testimonies prove, 1. That the expectations of an arising prodigy from Judea were then prevailing through the East. 2. That these expectations were founded on prophecy in the sacred books. 3. That the time for his coming was believed to be nigh at hand, the prophetic period being about accomplished. Finally, Herod, through his great Sanhedrim, has immediate access to these very sacred books which predict the very village where the Christ was to be born; just where our Jesus was born, in Bethlehem of Judea.
As a singular illustration of this whole subject, we quote the following: “So vivid was their (the Chinese’s) expectation of the Messiah ‘the Great Saint who,’ as Confucius says, ‘was to appear in the West’ so fully sensible were they not only of the place of his birth, but of the TIME of his coming, that about sixty years after the birth of our Saviour they sent their envoys to hail the expected Redeemer. These envoys encountered on their way the missionaries of Boodhism coming from India the latter announcing an incarnate God were taken to be the disciples of the true Christ, and were presented as such to their countrymen by the deluded ambassadors. Thus was this religion introduced into China.” (Schlegel’s Philosophy of History, 1:176.)
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘And gathering together all the chief priests and scribes of the people, he enquired of them where the Christ should be born.’
Aware that he needed to discover the whereabouts of such a prince, if one had indeed been born, Herod gathered together all the leaders of the Jews, ‘the chief priests’ who were responsible for the Temple. This definition would include the high priests past and present, the Temple treasurer, the overseers of the priestly courses, and other leading priests. ‘The Scribes’ were the learned teachers of the Law. And from them he enquired where the Messiah was to be born. If anyone knew, they would.
‘Scribes of the people’ contrasts with the chief priests. The chief priests received a certain respect because of their position but were mainly not appreciated by the people, whereas the Scribes tended to be looked up to by them. The chief priests and Scribes were enemies and they may in fact have been called in separately. But even if not, they would hardly have allowed their enmity to prevent them from responding to Herod’s ‘invitation’. It would have been dangerous to do so. And they may well have thought that he was calling a meeting of the almost defunct Sanhedrin which included both chief priests and Scribes.
We should possibly note that ‘the Scribes’ could include both Sadducees and Pharisees, as well possibly as more general Scribes. ‘Scribes of the people’ may thus be intended to distinguish the ones who were at loggerheads with the Sadducean priesthood. Matthew seems to have taken a delight in linking the Sadducees and Pharisees together, who whilst being enemies with each other, were united by their common bond of hatred of Jesus. Once the Sanhedrin again came into its own they would necessarily have to work together, however much they hated each other (something that is constantly coming out – Act 5:33-34; Act 23:6-9). And even Paul the Pharisee was appointed by the Sadducees for his task of rooting out Christians (Act 9:1-2), being prepared to work under their authority for the greater ‘good’. Compare ‘elders of the people’ who were the independent, usually wealthy, aristocrats, although that is not to deny that they may have had various leanings one way or the other.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Herod’s measures to meet the emergency:
v. 4. And when he had gathered all the chief priests and scribes of the people together, he demanded of them where Christ should be born. Not the entire Sanhedrin, or Great Council of the Jewish people, for that included also the elders, many of whom Herod had put to death, but the chief priests, the present incumbent of the office as well as former high priests; and the scribes, who were also political officers, assisting the civil magistrates in the role of confidential secretaries and statisticians. All of these were men of letters. Here again was a political move planned to strengthen Herod’s tottering prestige: to be summoned to a secret meeting might be thought a rare distinction by the Jewish leaders. And Herod, accustomed as he was to commanding, in this instance was very careful about couching his request in polite, though urgent, terms. The question he submitted was a theological one: Where, according to the transmitted records, according to the accepted tradition, is the birthplace of the Christ?
The answer of the Jewish theologians savors of a hidden satisfaction:
v. 5. And they said unto him, In Bethlehem of Judea; for thus it is written by the prophet,
v. 6a. And thou Bethlehem, in the land of Judah, art not the least among the princes of Judah. Their opinion was given without hesitation; it reflected the current opinion and agreed with Talmudic tradition. In their Scriptural proof they do not quote the Old Testament passage literally, but combine the words of the prophet, Mic 5:2, with 2Sa 5:2. Incidentally, their answer was shaped by some interpretation due to rabbinical teaching. “Art not thou the least?” the text inquires. Bethlehem may be little in size and influence, especially as compared with its metropolitan neighbor, but it is by no means the least in dignity and distinction. It may have been considered small and insignificant among the thousands of Judah, the cities that could boast a population of a thousand or more families, but it still had the best-founded claim for excellence among the princes of Judah. Here is indisputable evidence:
v. 6. For out of thee shall come a Governor, that shall rule My people Israel. Out of the despised village One should come forth, should regard it as His native town, who would combine the qualities of a Ruler with those of a tender, loving Friend and watchful Guardian. He whose birth was to distinguish Bethlehem-Judah, would be a Prince and Leader, who would make the shepherd’s sleepless devotion for those entrusted to him His life’s object.
Herod was convinced that the information he received was reliable. He resolved, therefore, to remove a possible rival by a speedy and thorough, though cruel method. But he must have more information:
v. 7. Then Herod, when he had privily called the wise men, enquired of them diligently what time the star appeared. It was a secret conference, just fitting in with his political trickery. Had he made his inquiries in a public reception, his own courtiers might have become suspicious, but the unsuspecting visitors could be coaxed to talk freely in a private interview and would not become alarmed. The exact time of the star’s first appearance was what Herod wanted, assuming probably that the birth of the child had occurred at the same time. All of which was an especially loathsome form of hypocrisy, an affectation of a kind interest in all that related to the Child in whose destinies the very stars seemed involved.
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
Mat 2:4. And when he had gathered &c. And having assembled. Campbell. All the chief priests, must comprehend here not only the high-priest for the time being, and his deputy, with those who formerly had borne that office; but also the heads of the twenty-four courses, as well as any other persons of peculiar eminence in the priesthood. See 1Ch 24:6. 2Ch 36:14. The scribes of the people, mean the rabbies or doctors, who explained the law to the people. See Michaelis’s Introduction to the New Testament.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Mat 2:4 . ] is regarded, after Grotius, by Fritzsche, Arnoldi, Lange, not as an assembly of the Sanhedrin (so commonly ), but an extraordinary convocation of all the high priests and learned men. This explanation, in which, moreover, is not to be taken literally, is the correct one. Indeed, , even without adding the third element of the Sanhedrin, the , may denote the Sanhedrin (Mat 20:18 , Mat 21:15 ; while, on the other hand, elsewhere, as in Mat 26:47 , Mat 27:1 , the are not mentioned along with them). But here is decisive, which would designedly draw attention to a full sitting of the high council, and therefore would have made it necessary not to omit an entire class of the members, but to mention in full all the three classes, as in Mat 16:21 , Mat 27:41 ; also stands opposed to the common interpretation, as the latter, in designating the Sanhedrin in Matthew, serves only to denote the more precisely (Mat 21:23 , Mat 26:3 ; Mat 26:47 , Mat 27:1 ). Herod summoned together all the theologians of the nation , because he wanted a theological answer; belongs to both words; observe the non-repetition of the article after .
] certainly comprises partly the actual ruling high priest ( , , Lev 15:10 ), partly those who had formerly held this high official post, which very often changed hands under the Herods. See Schrer, Stud. u. Krit. 1872, p. 593 ff. That the presidents of the twenty-four classes of priests are also to be understood (Bleek, Ewald), is nowhere certainly attested, and has against it the designation of the office itself, . Both reasons, moreover, are in opposition to our including, with Wieseler, the priestly nobles, or, with Schrer, the members of the at that time privileged high-priestly families (Joseph. Bell. iv. 3. 6), which is not justified by Act 4:6 , and cannot be proved by a few individual names mentioned in Josephus, whose relation to the high-priesthood is otherwise unknown (Schrer, p. 638 f.). The last high priests who ruled before the death of Herod were Matthias (5 B.C.), and Jozarus, who soon after followed him (Joseph. Antt. xvii. 4. 2, xvii. 6. 4).
] corresponds to the Hebr. that is, first, writers, then learned men (Ezr 7:6 ; Ezr 7:11 ; Neh 8:1 ; Gesenius, Thes. II. p. 966). This was the name specially of the expositors of the divine law, who, as Jewish canonists and learned councillors, belonged chiefly to the sect of the Pharisees, and in part to the Sanhedrin, and were held in great respect. See Lightfoot on the passage, and on Mat 23:13 ; Leyrer in Herzog’s Encykl. XIII. p. 731 ff.
] not in the sense of the future, but purely present: where is the Messiah born? The theologians were to tell what they knew concerning the birthplace of the Messiah. By this question Herod leaves it quite undetermined whether the birth had already taken place, or was still to come.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
And when he had gathered all the chief priests and scribes of the people together, he demanded of them where Christ should be born.
Herod, it should seem by this question, was no stranger to the prophecies of scripture, and had heard how Israel expected a king, that should arise to deliver them from bondage. And though the children of Israel, no more than Herod, had the most distant idea that this deliverance was of a spiritual nature; yet it proves how general the expectation was at this time of the coming Savior. The dying Jacob had said, that the sceptre should not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until the Shiloh should come. Gen 49:10 . And now the intelligence is brought, and by wise men also, from the East, that the sovereign stranger is arrived. Daniel also had in his day mentioned the time. And from all calculations the time was fulfilled. Dan 9:24-27 . Add to these, Herod knew, that he was by birth an Edomite, and a stranger, and therefore by the laws of Israel could not reign by just right. Deu 17:15 . See Psa 2:1-6 ; Act 4:27-28 ; Joh 18:37 .
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
4 And when he had gathered all the chief priests and scribes of the people together, he demanded of them where Christ should be born.
Ver. 4. And when he had gathered all the chief priests ] The true picture of Popish councils, who propound grave questions as this was, Where Christ should be born? and pretend to worship Christ, but intend to worry him: the Council of Trent was carried, against the simplicity of Christ, with such infinite guile and craft, as that themselves will even smile in the twiumphs of their own wits (when they hear it but mentioned) as at a master stratagem. It passed in France in manner of a proverb, That the modern council had more authority than that of the apostles, because their own pleasure was a sufficient ground for the decrees, without admitting the Holy Ghost. (Hist. of Council of Trent.)
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
4. ] i.e. says Lightfoot, he assembled the Sanhedrim . For the Sanhedrim consisting of seventy-one members, and comprising Priests, Levites, and Israelites (Maimonides), under the term are contained the two first of these, and under . . the third.
. are most likely the High Priest and those of his race, any who had served the office, and perhaps also the presidents of the twenty-four courses ( 1Ch 24:6 ).
. consisted of the teachers and interpreters of the Divine law, the and of St. Luke. But the are usually mentioned with these two classes as making up the Sanhedrim. See ch. Mat 16:21 ; Mat 26:3 ; Mat 26:59 . Possibly on this occasion the . and . only were summoned, the question being one of Scripture learning. “ , ” says Bp. Wordsworth, “is a word suggestive of the confusion now introduced into the nomination to the office of High Priest, when the true High Priest came from heaven to ‘purify the sons of Levi’ ( Mal 3:3 ).” Instead of one High Priest for life, there were many, made and unmade in rapid succession. As Spanheim says, Dub. Evan. ii. 37, “ confusa, Christo exhibito. Summum sacerdotium pessime habitum, Herodis et Romanorum licentia.”
] The present tense is often used indefinitely of subjects of prophecy, e.g. , ch. Mat 11:3 : Heb 10:37 ; , in an expression exactly parallel to this, Joh 7:42 .
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Mat 2:4 . Herod’s measures . . Was this a meeting of the Sanhedrim? Not likely, as the elders are not mentioned, who are elsewhere named as the representatives of the people, vide Mat 26:3 , “the chief priests, scribes and elders of the people”. Here we read only of the chief priests and scribes of the people. The article is not repeated before , the two classes being joined together as the theological experts of the people. Herod called together the leading men among the priests and scribes to consult them as to the birth-place of Messiah. Holtzmann (H. C.), assuring that a meeting of the Sanhedrim is meant, uses the fact as an argument against the historicity of the narrative. The Herod of history slew the Sanhedrists wholesale, and did his best to lull to sleep Messianic hopes. It is only the Herod of Christian legend that convenes the Sanhedrim, and makes anxious inquiries about Messiah’s birth-place. But the past policy of the king and his present action, as reported by the evangelist, hang together. He discouraged Messianic hopes, and, now that they have revived in spite of him, he must deal with them, and his first step is to consult the experts in as quiet a way as possible, to ascertain the whereabouts of the new-born child , etc.: it is not a historical question he submits to the experts as to where the Christ has been born, or shall be, but a theological one: where, according to the accepted tradition, is His birth-place? Hence , present tense.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
chief priests, &c.: i.e. the high priest and other priests who were members of the Sanhedrin, or National Council.
scribes of the People = the Sopherim, denoting the learned men of the People; learned in the Scriptures, and elders of the Sanhedrin. This incident shows that intellectual knowledge of the Scriptures without experimental delight in them is useless. Here it was used by Herod to compass Christ’s death (compare Luk 22:66). The scribes had no desire toward the person of the “Governor”, whereas the wise men were truly wise, in that they sought the person of Him of Whom the Scriptures spoke and were soon found at His feet. Head-knowledge without heart-love may be used against Christ.
demanded = kept enquiring.
where, &c. This was the first of the two important questions: the other being “what time”, &c, Mat 2:7.
Christ = the Messiah. See App-98.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
4. ] i.e. says Lightfoot, he assembled the Sanhedrim. For the Sanhedrim consisting of seventy-one members, and comprising Priests, Levites, and Israelites (Maimonides), under the term are contained the two first of these, and under . . the third.
. are most likely the High Priest and those of his race,-any who had served the office,-and perhaps also the presidents of the twenty-four courses (1Ch 24:6).
. consisted of the teachers and interpreters of the Divine law, the and of St. Luke. But the are usually mentioned with these two classes as making up the Sanhedrim. See ch. Mat 16:21; Mat 26:3; Mat 26:59. Possibly on this occasion the . and . only were summoned, the question being one of Scripture learning. , says Bp. Wordsworth, is a word suggestive of the confusion now introduced into the nomination to the office of High Priest, when the true High Priest came from heaven to purify the sons of Levi (Mal 3:3). Instead of one High Priest for life, there were many, made and unmade in rapid succession. As Spanheim says, Dub. Evan. ii. 37, confusa, Christo exhibito. Summum sacerdotium pessime habitum, Herodis et Romanorum licentia.
] The present tense is often used indefinitely of subjects of prophecy, e.g. , ch. Mat 11:3 : Heb 10:37; , in an expression exactly parallel to this, Joh 7:42.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Mat 2:4. , all) i.e., all who were in Jerusalem at that time.-, chief priests) The writers of the New Testament seldom speak of , priests, but generally of , chief priests. This word had distinct significations in the singular and plural number: the singular signifies the High Priest; the plural , either with or without the definite article, signified those priests who were more nearly related to the High Priest, and had from that circumstance greater influence than the rest.-See Act 4:6.- , scribes of the people) With the LXX. (scribe) corresponds to the Hebrew ;[80] in which sense (the scribes of the people), occurs in 1Ma 5:42, cf. also Deu 20:5. They render also [81] by . And that signification suits also the present passage, where a Theological Reply is spoken of. The scribes of the people are spoken of in contradistinction to the chiefs of the priests: and were private men or doctors, well versed in the Scriptures; cf. note on ch. Mat 22:35.-, inquired. He ought to have done so before.- , where Christ is born) He makes the question of the Magi his own. The present tense of the verb (is born), accords with the general expectation of the coming of the Messiah, which prevailed at that time.
[80] i.e. a scribe (LXX. , ); hence from the art of writing having been especially used forensically, a magistrate, prefect of the people: specially is used of the prefects of the people of Israel in Egypt, Exo 5:6-19, and in the desert, Num 11:16 (used of the seventy elders), Deu 20:9 etc., etc.; magistrates in the towns of Palestine, Deu 16:18, etc., etc.; used of the superior magistrates, Pro 6:7.-Gesenius.-(I. B.)
[81] i.e. a scribe, Psa 45:2, Ezr 9:2-3; specially (a) the kings scribe; 2Sa 8:17; 2Sa 20:25; 2Ki 12:17; 2Ki 19:2; 2Ki 22:3-4; (b) a military scribe who has the charge of keeping the muster-rolls, Jer 37:15; Jer 52:25; 2Ki 25:19; (c) in the later books a person skilled in the sacred writings, , 1Ch 27:32; Ezr 7:6, etc., etc.; or 1) a scribe, a royal scribe accompanying a satrap or governor of a province, Ezr 4:8-9; Ezr 4:17; Ezr 4:23; (2) -one skilled in the sacred books, Ezr 7:12; Ezr 7:21.-Ibid.-(I. B.)
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Scribes
(Greek – “” = “writer”) Heb. “spherim,” “to write,” “set in order,” “count.” The scribes were so called because it was their office to make copies of the Scriptures; to classify and teach the precepts of oral law (See Scofield “Mat 3:7”) and to keep careful count of every letter in the O.T. writings. Such an office was necessary in a religion of law and precept, and was an O.T. function 2Sa 8:17; 2Sa 20:25; 1Ki 4:3; Jer 8:8; Jer 36:10; Jer 36:12; Jer 36:26. To this legitimate work the scribes added a record of rabbinical decisions on questions of ritual (Halachoth); the new code resulting from those decisions (Mishna); the Hebrew sacred legends (Gemara, forming with the Mishna the Talmud); commentaries on the O.T. (Midrashim); reasonings upon these (Hagada); and finally, mystical interpretations which found in Scripture meanings other than the grammatical, lexical, and obvious ones (the Kabbala); not unlike the allegorical method of Origen, or the modern Protestant “spiritualizing” interpretation. In our Lord’s time, to receive this mass of writing superposed upon the Scriptures was to be orthodox; to return to the Scriptures themselves was heterodoxy–our Lord’s most serious offence.
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
the chief: Mat 21:15, Mat 21:23, Mat 26:3, Mat 26:47, Mat 27:1, 1Ch 24:4-19, 2Ch 36:14, Ezr 10:5, Neh 12:7, Psa 2:2, Joh 7:32, Joh 18:3
scribes: Mat 7:29, Mat 13:52, 2Ch 34:13, 2Ch 34:15, Ezr 7:6, Ezr 7:11, Ezr 7:12, Jer 8:8, Mar 8:31, Luk 20:19, Luk 23:10, Joh 8:3, Act 4:5, Act 6:12, Act 23:9
he demanded: Mal 2:7, Joh 3:10
Reciprocal: 1Sa 6:2 – called 2Ki 6:13 – spy where 2Ch 15:3 – a teaching Psa 62:4 – consult Mat 22:42 – What
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
2:4
Verse 4. Herod was an Idumaean by natton but a Jew in religion. He thus had learned something of the Old Testament Scriptures. and knew that it had been prophesied that a king was some day to be born to the Jewish nation. However, he was not sufficiently informed to locate the town where it was to take place. He called upon the priests and scribes for the information because they were supposed to be able to give it. (See Lev 10:11; Deu 17:9; Mal 2:7)
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
And when he had gathered all the chief priests and scribes of the people together, he demanded of them where Christ should be born.
[And when he had gathered all the chief priests and scribes of the people together.] That is, he assembled the Sanhedrim. Herod is said by very many authors to have slain the Sanhedrim, but this is neither to be understood of the whole Sanhedrim, nor, if it were to be understood of the whole, would it denote the total subversion of the Sanhedrim. The Babylonian Gemarists do thus relate the story: “Herod was a servant of the Asmonean family. He cast his eyes upon a young maid [of that family]. On a certain day he heard the Bath Kol [a voice from heaven] saying, Whatsoever servant shall now rebel shall prosper. He arose up against his masters, and slew them all.” And a little after; “Herod said, Who is there that interprets these words, ‘Thou shalt set a king over thee out of the midst of thy brethren?’ (Deu 17:15). The Rabbins [interpreted the words]. He rose up and slew all the Rabbins, leaving only Bava Ben Buta, with whom he consulted.”
Herod was to overcome two difficulties, that he might, with the peace and favour of the Jews, become their king. For, although he had been raised unto the kingdom by the Romans, nevertheless, that he might establish his throne, the people remaining quiet and accepting him, first it seemed necessary to him that the Asmonean family should be removed out of the way, which, formerly governing the people, they had some affection and love for, and which still remaining, he suspected he could scarce be secure. Secondly, that law of setting no king over them but of their brethren debarred him, since he himself was of the stock of Edom. Therefore he took away all those Rabbins, who, adhering stiffly to this law, opposed, what they could, his coming to the kingdom. “But all the Rabbins indeed he slew not (saith the Gloss upon the place alleged); for the sons of Betira were left alive, who held the chair when Hillel came out of Babylon.”
Therefore he slew not all the elders of the Sanhedrim, but those only who, taking occasion from that law, opposed his access to the kingdom. Out of that slaughter the two sons of Betira escaped, who held the first places in the Sanhedrim after the death of Shemaiah and Abtalion. Shammai also escaped, who, according as Josephus relates, foretold this slaughter. Hillel escaped likewise, if he were then present; and Menahem, who certainly was there, and who thenceforth sat second in the chair. Bava Ben Buta escaped also, as the Gemara relates, who afterward persuaded Herod that he should repair the Temple to expiate this bloody impiety. And others escaped.
[The chief priests.] When the Sanhedrim consisted of priests, Levites, and Israelites (as Maimonides teacheth), under the word chief priests; are comprehended the two former; namely, whosoever of the clergy were members of the Sanhedrim; and under the scribes of the people are comprehended all those of the Sanhedrim who were not of the clergy.
Among the priests were divers differences:
I. Of the priests some were called, as if you would say the plebeian priests; namely, such who indeed were not of the common people, but wanted school education, and were not reckoned among the learned, nor among such as were devoted to religion. For seeing the whole seed of Aaron was sacerdotal, and priests were not so much made as born, no wonder if some ignorant and poor were found among them. Hence is that distinction, The poor Israelites and the poor priests are gatherers. A Votary priest, and a Plebeian priest. And caution is given, That the oblation be not given to a Plebeian priest. And the reason of it is added, “Because whosoever giveth an oblation to a Plebeian priest doth all one as if he should give it to a lion; of which it may be doubted whether he will treat it under his feet and eat it or not. So it may be doubted of a Plebeian priest, whether he will eat it in cleanness or in uncleanness.” However ignorant and illiterate these were, yet they had their courses at the altar according to their lot, being instructed at that time by certain rules for the performing their office, appointed them by lot. You would stand amazed to read those things which are supposed concerning the ignorance and rudeness even of the high-priest himself.
II. There were others who were called Idiot; or private, priests; who although they both were learned, and performed the public office at the altar, yet were called private, because they were priests of a lower, and not of a worthier, order.
III. The worthier degree of priests was fourfold, besides the degree of the high-priest, and of the sagan his substitute. For, 1. There were the heads of the Ephemeries; or courses; in number twenty-four. 2. There were the heads of the families in every course. Of both, see the Jerusalem Talmud. 3. The presidents over the various offices in the Temple. Of them, see Shekalim. 4. Any priests or Levites, indeed, (although not of these orders), that were chosen into the chief Sanhedrim. Chief priests; therefore, here and elsewhere, where the discourse is of the Sanhedrim, were they who, being of the priestly or Levitical stock, were chosen into that chief senate.
[The scribes of the people.] A scribe; denotes more generally any man learned, and is opposed to the word rude; or clownish. “Two, who ate together, are bound to give thanks each by themselves, when both of them are scribes: But if one be a scribe, and the other ignorant [or a clown], let the scribe give thanks, and thence satisfaction is made for the duty of the ignorant; or unlearned person.” So we read of The scribes of the Samaritans; that is, the learned among the Samaritans: for among them there were no traditionarians.
More particularly, scribes; denote such, who, being learned, and of scholastic education, addicted themselves especially to handling the pen, and to writing. Such were the public notaries in the Sanhedrim, registrars in the synagogues, amanuenses who employed themselves in transcribing the law, phylacteries, short sentences to be fixed upon the door-posts, bills of contracts, or divorce, etc. And in this sense a scribe; and a Talmudic doctor; are sometimes opposed; although he was not Tanna; a Talmudic doctor, who was not Sophra; a scribe; in the sense above mentioned. In the Babylonian Talmud it is disputed (a passage not unworthy our reading), what disagreement in calculation may be borne with between an expounder out of the chair, or the pulpits, and a writer of contracts, or bills of divorce, or a register, etc., in reckoning up the year of the Temple, of the Greek empire, etc. Concerning which matter, this, among other things, is concluded on, that a scribe computes more briefly, a doctor more largely. It will not repent one to read the place; nor that whole tract called The tract of the scribes; which dictates to the scribes of that sort of which we are now speaking, concerning writing out the law, the phylacteries, etc.
But, above all others, the fathers of the traditions are called scribes (who were, indeed, the elders of the Sanhedrim): which is clear enough in these and such-like expressions: The words of the scribes are more lovely than the words of the law; that is, traditions are better than the written law: This is of the words of the scribes; that is, ‘this is from the traditionary decrees.’
These, therefore, whom Matthew calls the scribes of the people; were those elders of the Sanhedrim, who were not sprung from the sacerdotal or Levitical stock, but of other tribes: the elders of the Sanhedrim, sprung of the blood of the priests, were the scribes of the clergy; the rest were the scribes of the people.
We may therefore guess, and that no improbable conjecture, that, in this assembly, called together by Herod, these were present, among others: — 1. Hillel, the president. 2. Shammai, vice-president. 3. The sons of Betira, Judah, and Joshua. 4. Bava Ben Buta. 5. Jonathan the son of Uzziel, the Chaldee paraphrast. 6. Simeon, the son of Hillel.
Fuente: Lightfoot Commentary Gospels
Mat 2:4. All the chief-priests. Probably not a formal meeting of the Sanhedrin, since to this belonged the elders also, who are not mentioned here. Literally: high priests. It includes, besides the one actual high-priest, those who had held the office (for the Romans often transferred it, contrary to the Jewish law), and, perhaps, the heads of the twenty-four courses of priests.
Scribes of the people. The successors of Ezra, the official copyists of the Scriptures, who naturally became its expounders. These two classes were the proper ones to answer Herods question.
Where the Christ should be born. An acknowledgment that the Messiah had been promised by God. Herods subsequent cruelty was a defiance of God. The scribes knew the letter, but not the spirit of the Scripture. The Magi, with less knowledge but more faith, were nearer the truth. The indifference of the former was hostility in the germ.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Herod being in great perplexity, convened a council of the chief priests and scribes, and demands of them the place where Christ, the promised Messiah was to be born. They readily reply, out of the prophet Micah, Mic 5:2. that Bethlehem was the place; this was the city of David’s birth, and of Christ’s the son of David. Bethlehem signifies the house of bread, and was so called from its fertility and fruitfulness, and as some think with reference to Christ, the true bread of life, born there. Bethlehem was a mean and contemptible place in itself, but being honoured with Christ’s presence, how great is it!
Learn thence, that the presence of Christ dignifies and exalts a place, how mean soever in itself. Bethlehem, though a little city in itself, yet is not the least among the cities of Judah, because Christ is born there.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
Mat 2:4. And when he had gathered all the chief priests This expression must be intended to comprehend not only the high priest for the time being, and his deputy, with those who had formerly borne that office, but also the heads of the twenty-four courses, as well as any other persons of peculiar eminence in the priesthood, in which sense Josephus uses the word, Antiq. lib. 20. cap. 8. (al. 6,) 8, p. 973. The scribes of the people It would seem, from Ezr 7:11-12; 1Ch 24:6; 2Ch 34:13, that they were of the tribe of Levi only, and so were either priests or Levites. As their office was to transcribe and prepare fair copies of the law of Moses, and other parts of the Old Testament, (a very necessary work before printing was invented,) they became, of course, well acquainted with the Scriptures, and were ordinarily employed in explaining them to the people: whence the chief of them were called doctors of the law. They, or at least some of them, together with the chief priests and elders, constituted the sanhedrim, or great council of the nation. But in this place, when no public business was to be done, but only the predictions of the ancient prophets were to be searched into by those who were thought to excel others in the knowledge of them, it does not appear that any fixed and legal council was summoned; but only that an extraordinary meeting of learned men was called by the king, that they might judge of the question of the wise men. He demanded of them where Christ, i.e, the promised Messiah, was to be born. The wise men had said nothing about Christ, or the Messiah, but only about a king, or, the king of the Jews. But Herod presently conceived that this king of the Jews that was born must be the Messiah promised Psalms 2.; Daniel 9.; and therefore desired to know of them the place of his birth, according to their received traditions, and sense of the prophecies of Scripture. But it is to be well observed, that we must understand Herod as inquiring, not concerning an event considered by him as already come to pass, but concerning a matter yet future and uncertain. For although he understood from the wise men that the birth of the Messiah had even now taken place, yet he concealed his knowledge of this, and his whole design, from the Jews. It is easy to observe how strongly all this story implies that a general expectation of the Messiah now prevailed: and it is plain Herod, in a sense, both believed the Jewish Scriptures, and that the birth of the Messiah was foretold in them. And yet, which discovered the height of madness, as well as of impiety and cruelty, he was contriving to destroy him! to destroy him whose birth, and reign, and glory, God in his word, he believed, had infallibly foretold!
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Verse 4
Chief priests. The priests were divided into twenty-four classes; the leaders of these classes, and perhaps some others of particular distinction, were called chief priests. There was but one high priest.–Scribes; a class of men learned in theology and in the law, and often employed as writers. Of the chief priests and scribes, there was composed a council of seventy-two men, called the Sanhedrim which was the great council of the Jewish nation.–Where Christ should be born. Herod was a Jew, and a believer in the Old Testament Scriptures; and he wished that those who were best acquainted with the subject, should inform him where, according to the divine predictions, the Messiah should appear. His conduct, in this instance, was not, therefore, an ordinary case of political cruelty towards a human rival, but a high-handed and deliberate act of hostility against the of counsels of God. He calls upon the great religious tribunal of the nation to consult the sacred records, and inform him, with official solemnity, what God intended to do, in order that he might a adopt effectual measures, by means of violence and murder, to prevent its being done. That a man near seventy years of age and just ready to descend into the grave, should deliberately set himself at work to oppose by open violence, designs which he himself recognized as divine, and which had stood so recorded for seven hundred years, shows to what an extent human guilt and infatuation may sometimes proceed.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
2:4 And when he had gathered all the {d} chief priests and {e} scribes of the people together, he demanded of them where Christ should be born.
(d) The chief priests, that is, such as were of Aaron’s family, who were divided into twenty-four orders. 1Ch 24:5 2Ch 36:14 .
(e) They that expound the law to the people, for the Hebrews take this word for another, which means as much as to expound and to declare.