tion, and that in God's true Son (Hos. xi. 1). Hence arose such comparisons between the externals of Christ's life and the history of the nation as that which has now to be inquired into. But we could not, it may be premised, have arrived by a priori reasoning at the nature of the correspondence, in such a way as to anticipate the circumstances of Christ's life by way of necessary inference from the life of the nation. This is well expressed by Dr Wordsworth, in his note on Matt. ii. 15.

'This was spoken, in the first instance, of the ancient Church of God delivered by Him from Egypt in its infancy. The Holy Spirit applies it to Christ; and He thus teaches

us:

'To regard Christ as One with His Church in all ages of her history. In the persecution of the literal Egypt, He teaches us to see a persecution of Christ. In all their affliction He was afflicted, and the Angel of His presence saved them (Is. Ixiii. 9). He was with them in the Exodus, and led them through the Red Sea: they drank of that Spiritual Rock that followed them, and that Rock was Christ (I Cor. x. 4-). They were in Him, and He in them.

'To regard what is said by the Holy Spirit concerning the literal Israel as God's Son, as having a prelusive reference to what is declared in the Gospel concerning the only begotten Son of God; and to see under the guidance of the Holy Spirit speaking in the Gospel, its λńpwow, or accomplishment, in Christ.

'Thus, in His dealings with His own prophecies, the Holy Spirit opens to us new lights as to their meaning, lights which we could never have hoped to receive.'

There are two classes of interpretation here to be considered:

1. The words of St Matthew, above quoted, are commonly supposed to indicate that Christ went down into Egypt, in order that by a subsequent exodus He might give occasion for the fulfilment of the prophetic utterance, 'Out of Egypt have I called my Son.' The analogy of the two

calls, as thus limited to the times of exodus, is seemingly a slight one. The bringing up of Israel out of Egypt was a signal deliverance from oppression there endured; Christ, on the contrary, escaped Herod's massacre by this descent into Egypt and sojourn there. Egypt was to Him a refuge; to them a house of bondage (Ex. xx. 1). The journey of Moses (Ex. iv. 20) bears a certain resemblance to that of Joseph, 'and the young child and his mother: but the latter was undertaken in fear of Herod, and the former when all danger had passed away. The command to leave Egypt, in the one case, has an obvious verbal correspondence with the command to return into Egypt in the other. To Moses it was said, 'Go, return into Egypt; for all the men are dead which sought thy life' (Ex. iv. 19). The command to Joseph was, 'Go into the land of Israel: for they are dead which sought the young child's life. In all this there is more almost of contrast than of agreement; the solitary coincidence being, that as Israel was brought up out of Egypt, so the infant Jesus, though under very different circumstances, was brought up out of Egypt. These contrarieties would, however, testify to the historic truth of the account; for it is incredible that an analogy so precarious should have formed the basis of the narrative.

2. Dr Lee, who rejects the above rendering, writes1 as follows:

"It is said that the child was in Egypt until the death of Herod. It is added, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Out of Egypt have I called my son.' Thus the passage stands in our version; but I ask, How can this apply to the context? It is only said here that Christ remained so long in Egypt that it might be fulfilled, &c.; and then the prophecy is cited. It is not said that He left Egypt, and so the prediction was fulfilled the account of His leaving Egypt is not entered upon till we come to the twentieth verse; and then we hear

1 Serm. and Diss. p. 278.

nothing of this prophecy. I prefer taking it therefore in the sense in which I have translated the passage from Hosea: Since or from (the times of) Egypt, I have named (Israel) my son."

To this second method of interpretation Bengel e. g. has not hesitated to give in his adherence. It is required, argues this commentator, by the parallelism; and the expression call' is inapplicable to what is invariably described as a leading, or bringing out from Egypt. Several points in the original

context have to be considered.

The first clause of Hos. xi. I, describes God's love of the infant nation Israel; the second clause speaks of that 'call from Egypt,' the meaning of which remains to be determined. The above argument from the parallelism assumes that as the first clause speaks of Israel as a child, so the second, by its expression, 'from Egypt,' must denote a reckoning onward from the nation's infancy. The parallelism may be illustrated from the writings of the same prophet:

'And I will give her her vineyard from thence, and the valley of Achor for a door of hope: and she shall sing there as in the days of her youth, and as in the day when she came up out of the land of Egypt.' (Hos. ii. 15.)

Whatever may be the precise value of this argument from the parallelism, it may be noted that, from the Egypt-time, is an admissible interpretation of the words, 'from Egypt,' as is shewn by Hos. xii. 9; xiii. 4: 'And I that am the Lord thy God from the land of Egypt will yet make thee to dwell in tabernacles, as in the days of the solemn feast.' 'Yet I am the Lord thy God from the land of Egypt, and thou shalt know no God but me: for there is no Saviour beside me.' Where the expression, from the land of Egypt, may not be restrained only to the act of bringing them out' of Egypt, but comprehend both his preservation of them there and his bringing them out thence, and all other great benefits by which, from that time of declaring them to be his people,

1 See Pococke on the passages cited; where the LXX., agreeing with the Targum, insert ἀνήγαγον.

he approved himself to be their God, a God to them in a more peculiar manner than to other nations...' 'The Lord and God of them and of all was he from the beginning, but their Lord by more particular interest, from the land of Egypt, in framing them wherein into a people to himself, and bringing them out thence with mighty signs and wonders, and protecting them thenceforward, he shewed such evident tokens of his power and favour, as neither before nor to any other people.'

Several authorities agree in the rendering, 'I named.' Thus, the author of the MS. Arab. translation, from Egypt have I named him my son; according to which way Kimchi also gives this meaning: Out of Egypt I began to call him my son. They seem to follow the Chaldee, which hath out of Egypt I called them sons. Israel there began to exist as the chosen nation, and was there first named 'my son': 'Thus saith the Lord, Israel is my son, even my first-born' (Ex. iv. 22). In all this, however, the rendering of the phrase, from Egypt, is most important. The clause might be rendered, without great variation in the sense: from the Egypt-time I called to (i.e. summoned or invited) my son. This gives perhaps the simplest construction, and agrees best with the apparent meaning of the context, which will next be briefly noticed.

In the second verse of Hos. xi. the word call recurs, and there in the sense, invite: As they called them, so they went from them:' which many interpret of an unheeded call by God's prophets to His worship. Others interpret it of invitations to idolatry, as seems most in accordance with the marked contrast in the next verse: Whereas I', even I, had taught Israel to go. The preceding verses may be rendered:

'When Israel was a child, then I loved him; and from the Egypt-time I called my son.

'They called them, so they went from before them: to sacrifice to Baalim, to burn incense to graven images.'

.ואנכי תרגלתי 1

Le Clerc's rendering shews the emphasis: 'Sed vocarunt Israelitas alii, et propter hos sic

abierunt...Ego docui Ephraimum ire, cepit eum Moses in brachia sua.'

2 Fut. lit. 'that they might.'

God's lifelong care is contrasted with their unfaithfulness, and His love with their ingratitude; till it is declared at length (ver. 5) that they shall not return to the land of Egypt (i.e. to the good times of old'), but the Assyrian shall be his king, because they refused to return.' The name Egypt was associated with the spring-time of national existence, with Jacob's blessing of the nascent tribes, with their election to divine sonship in that land, before the exodus.

This interpretation, which makes the call precede the exodus, seems to simplify St Matthew's application of the prophecy :

'When he arose, he took the young child and his mother by night, and departed into Egypt. And was there until the death of Herod that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, From the Egypt-time2 called I my son' (ii. 14, 15).

Subjoined are extracts from the Arabic Gospel of the Infancy, to which Dr Lee thus refers. 'In the apocryphal gospel of our Saviour's infancy, I find this text cited, not with reference to Christ's egress from Egypt, but to his being preserved there from the cruelty of Herod. It will not be too much, therefore, to suppose that, in the early times of the church, this view of the text may have generally prevailed.'

This Gospel sets forth Christ as miraculously designated God's Son, and there, in Egypt, so acknowledged. It then adds, 'Here was fulfilled the prophecy which saith, From Egypt have I called my son.' Israel was called 'My son, my first-born,' (Ex. iv. 22) in Egypt and thenceforward. Christ was acknowledged as God's son in and from that land. The extracts are taken from Mr Cowper's translation of the Apocryphal Gospels, pp. 178–180.

1 Compare Hos. ii. 15, already cited.

To illustrate this rendering of the Greek, compare ἐκ κοιλίας μητρός, Matt. xix. 12; EK VEÓTηTos, Acts xxvi. 43; and the corresponding classical usages.

'Here the Greek says out of, viewing the time specified not as a point from which something is reckoned, but, by a more vivid conception, as an expanse out of which something is dif fused.' Winer.