losophy or for history; but we say, that history can be rationally conceived of only as a progress towards some one end, and that the history of philosophy is instructive only as we view it as a constant means of arriving at real truth.

The philosophy of Herbart is contributing to the overthrow of the purely idealistic systems, and may be the transition to the reëstablishment of a veritable realism.

Idealism, as an absolute and final system, must be abandoned; but only in its ruins, and in part from its ruins will a new system be reconstructed. This philosophy will not be the old dogmatism which Herbart has striven to reestablish; it will be a realism attempered by idealism, a rational realism, founded, not on the dogma of the real identity of subject and object, of thought and being, but upon the harmony which God himself has established between our reason and the external world, between intelligent nature and real nature, between the reason which is in us and that divine reason of which the universe is the expression.

Such is the substance of the conclusion, the final summary, of these elaborate volumes. Though many points here are stated too indefinitely, and though others are not at all peculiar to the German system, but a part of all philosophy, yet it seems to us that the summary is upon the whole cautious and candid. It may appear cold, in view of the theological and moral questions which are at stake; but the clear, intellectual dissent of a candid historian of philosophy, is a more influential authority against a false dogma than many an impulsive invective of those who know not the difficulty of the problems, especially when it is addressed to the members of the French Institute.

Of all the works that have appeared upon the German philosophy, this one is to be most commended. The account of these bold and difficult systems in the able and popular History of Modern Philosophy, by J. D. Morell, is the least satisfactory portion of that interesting work; it is less thorough, and the results of less independent investigation than are his sketches of either the French or the English schools.

M. Willm promises another volume to complete his work, which shall give an account of the later philosophy of Schelling; of the various parties in Hegel's school; the rage of Bauer and the desperation of Feuerbach; of the disciples of Herbart and Fries; of Reinhold in Jena; and Ulrici in Halle; of Weisse and the younger Fichte; of Beneke in Berlin, and others still. The whole is to be

1851.]

Meyer as a Commentator.

85

completed by a bibliographical review of those works in German philosophy since the time of Kant, which still retain their value in the various departments of science. And he trusts that the final impression left upon the reader will be, the conviction, that “in the country of Kant, sound reason will eventually triumph over the vagaries of speculative imagination and the excesses of a haughty dialectics, which can only be done by constantly putting ourselves anew in the right position for hearing the voice of consciousness and knowing the eternal interests of humanity."

ARTICLE VI.

COMMENTARY ON THE SECOND AND THIRD CHAPTERS OF THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW.

From the German of H. A. W. Meyer. By B. B. Edwards.

[DR. Meyer is consistorial counsellor at Hanover, and pastor primarius of the city church. Nine Parts of his Commentary on the New Testament are published, embracing the four Gospels, the Acts, and the Epistles to the Romans, Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians and Philemon. Owing to the demand for new editions of the earlier parts, and the pressure of other engagements, Dr. M. has called to his aid Prof. Huther, of Schwerin, who has prepared a Commentary on the Epistles to Timothy and Titus, and Dr. Lünemann, of Göttingen, who has published a Commentary on the Epistles to the Thessalonians. Second editions of Meyer's commentaries on the first three Gospels, and on the First Epistle to the Corinthians, have appeared. The later volumes, and especially the second editions, exhibit very marked improvement both in ability in expounding the text, and in orthodox views and feelings. In the Preface to the Commentary on the Colossians, 1848, the author writes: "It is the spirit of God which quickens the church; and it is the old, simple truth of the Gospel, which makes the church free, and one and invincible. On this rock, on which the church is placed, will the waves and foam of the spirits who affect another gospel than that of Nazareth, break and disappear." "The stock remains the VOL. VIII. No. 29.

8

same as that which the Reformation drew from the divine germ of the Gospel. All life which does not proceed from this stock, is the life of destruction, the more feverish, as now, the more it is nourished only from without; and only the more dangerous, when placed, as now, under the power of the restless spirit of the times. Experience has sufficiently proclaimed, and it exists in us, that we are to grow up in conformity with the Scriptures, to that unity of Gospel faith, which, with all the variety of individual views, takes not away the unity of the spirit, and stands and remains on the foundation, which is God's living Son, his Light and Life, his Work and Spirit in his Word, which endures forever, while the fashion of this world passeth away."

The following passages will present, perhaps, a favorable specimen of the author's mode of exposition, though his views are still more conservative and sober now than they were six years ago, when the second edition of the Commentary on Matthew was published. We have omitted some comments and references as not interesting or important to the English reader.-TR.]

CHAP. II. v. 1. Tervnévros. The star is conceived as appearing contemporarily with the birth, v. 7. How long it was after the birth before the Magi came, appears approximately from v. 16, according to which, with all Herod's cruelty, and with his aim to make sure work, we may place the arrival of the Magi, with the most probability, somewhat over a year after the birth. A is metabatic, serving to introduce another narrative. "Bethlehem Judah," to distinguish it from Bethlehem in the tribe of Zebulon. Josh. 19: 15. Our Bethlehem (Ephratah, Gen. 35: 16, 19) lay in the tribe of Judah, comp. Judges 17: 9, 19: 1, 1 Sam. 17: 12, six miles south of Jerusalem.1 vuégaus, Gen. 26: 1, 2, 2 Sam. 21: 1; "of Herod," Herod the Great, son of Antipater, received in the year 714 U. C., from the Senate the kingly dignity, through Antony, by whom, not long before, he had been made tetrarch; but he did not attain actual possession of his kingdom till 717, after the capture of Jerusalem by himself and Sosius. He died in 750.2 Magi, 7, formed among the Persians and Medes, a much respected priestly class; they employed themselves especially with the mysteries of nature, astrology

1 Reland Pal. p. 642, Rosenmüller Bibl. Handb. II. 1. p. 123, Robinson Researches II. 158.

2 Wieseler Chronol. Synop. 1843, p. 50. On the whole Herod family, Wolf Curae, p. 60, Jahn's Archaeologie II. 1, 563, Schlosser Geschich. d. Fam. Herod. Leip. 1818, Winer Realwört. 1847, I. p. 481.

1851.]

The Star in the East.

87

and medicine. There was also among the Babylonians, Jer. 39: 3, at the time of the Chaldean dynasty, such an order, at the head of which was Daniel, Dan. 2: 48. The name Magian, was then in general transferred to all without distinction of country, commonly wandering orientals, who had dedicated themselves to those sciences.2 ȧnò áraz, belong to payo, Magians from the East, i. e. oriental Magians. By this connection, the position of the words is the most natural; the article oi anò, etc., is not required, since μáyo is without the article. The indefinite phrase "eastern countries," is to be left indefinite. It has been conjectured that the Magi came from Arabia, Persia, Parthia, Babylonia, Egypt. But neither from the entirely indefinite expression, "from the East," nor in the kind of gifts, v. 11, have we anything but an approximately sure datum. Wholly groundless is the attempt to determine the number of the Magi, from the three fold gifts, and on account of Ps. 72: 10, Is. 49: 7, 60: 3, 10, to regard the Magi as kings. Are we to view them as heathen, as most, since the time of the Fathers, have supposed, or Jews? In favor of the first supposition, is the inquiry, "Where is he who is born king of the Jews;" and how consonant also was the Messianic idea that the heathen appeared to pay homage to a Jewish king? Is. 60: 3 seq.! The expectation of the Jews, also, of the universal dominion of their Messiah might have been then sufficiently extended in the oriental countries, to lead actual heathen astrologers to the Jewish capital, with the intention of making the inquiry." "Jerusalem." In the capital they expected the most reliable information.

4

VERSE 2. Táo gives the reason of the question. "His star," the star pointing out his birth. We are to conceive of an extraordinary star, not before seen by them, at whose appearing, they conclude from astrological rules, the birth of a new Jewish king. From the word dozno, not άoroor, and unquestionably from v. 9, it appears that a constellation is not meant. This is contrary to the opinion of many, who refer to a very near conjunction of Jupiter

1 Herod. L. 132, Diog. Laert. 1, 1–9, Aelian, V. H. 2, 17, Porphyr. de Abstin. an. 4, 16, Cic. de Div. 1, 41, Plin. N. H. 24, 29, 30, 2.

2 Wetstein in loc., Winer II. p. 45.

Mt. 8: 11, 24: 27, Luke 13: 29, Rev. 21: 13.

Suet. Vesp. 4, Tac. H. 5, 13, Joseph. B. J. 6, 5, 4.

5 Comp. Cass. Dio. Hist. R. 45, 1, Suet. Oct. 94.

Kepler de J. Ch. vero anno natalitio, Franc. 1606, Münter Stern d. Weisen Copenh. 1827, Ideler Handb. d. Chronol. II. 399, Paulus, Neander, Leben J. 29 Olshausen doubtful, Krabbe Vorlesun. 96, Wieseler Chronol. Synop. 62, Ebrard Krit. d. Evang. Gesch. p. 248.

and Saturn in the constellation Pisces, which occurred U. C. 747; with which still, Ebrard, defining dorno more exactly, sees in the star of the Magi, not that constellation itself, but the new star of the first magnitude, which Kepler saw in 1604 at the conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn, but which disappeared in 1605, while Wieseler has recourse to a comet observed in China in A. D. 750. The Jew Abarbanel1 concluded from a similar conjunction in 1463, that the birth of the Messiah was near, and indicates the constellation Pisces as significant for the Jews. But v. 9 points only to a remarkable star, to one going and standing in a wonderful manner; so it is clear that neither a comet, nor a planet, nor a meteor is meant. The church fathers conceive it to be an angel. The splendor of the star is wondrously painted by Ignatius ad Eph. 19. It was a general belief of antiquity that the appearance of stars denoted great changes, and particularly the birth of important men. The Jews especially believed in a star of the Messiah. év zy ávaroly. Some translate, "in the rising.” But on account of v. 9, where the antithesis of ¿v rỹ ávarolỹ, and οὗ ἦν τὸ παιδίον obviously bring out the local difference ; and on account of anò ávar. in v. 1, the translation "in the East" is to be preferred, which also well agrees with the xai лQоσжννεiv, by casting one's self down with the face before one, reverence and subjection were denoted.

-

ouer following — on the ground, Gen. 19: 1, 42:

6, 18: 2, 48: 12, Herod. I. 134, Nep. Con. 3. Curt. 5, 2. 6, 6. VERSE 3. Herod trembled as he feared the overthrow of his throne; the inhabitants were troubled as they expected the cruelty of their tyrant, revolutions and political horrors, it then being the belief that very sad times would precede the Messianic kingdom.* 'Taposóλvua fem. form. Comp. 3, 5, Jos. de Bell. J. 1, 5, 7, 18, c. Ap.

I. 1047.

VERSE 4. Πάντας laov is not considered by Fritzsche after Grotius as a meeting of the Sanhedrim, but as an extraordinary convention of all the chief priests and scribes, in order to investigate the thing more exactly. But the words themselves admit the meaning Sanhe

1 Maajne haschuah, Amst. 1547.

2 " A divine and angelic power, appearing in the emblem of a star." Theophyl 8 Wetstein in loc., Baur Symbol. u. Mythol. II. 308.

Bertholdt Christol. Jud. p. 55.

5 Ebrard, Wieseler, etc. Comp. Stob. Ecl. Phys. 1, 20, Luke 1: 78.

6 The dolores Messiae, Sanhedr. f. 98. 2. Shabb. 118, 1. Lightfoot Hor. ad

Marc. 13, 19. Schöttgen Hor. II. 512, Bertholdt Christ. Jud. p. 45.

7 "An assembly of learned men, extra ordinem, convened by the king."