Глава 1

1–17. Inscription. Genealogy of Jesus Christ. – 18–25. Christmas. Inscription. The Gospel of Matthew in Russian and Slavic translations has the same title. But this title is not similar to the title of the Gospel in Greek. It is not as clear as in Russian and Slavic, and in short - “according to Matthew”, but there are no words “Gospel” or “good news”. The Greek expression "according to Matthew" requires explanation. The best explanation is the following. The Gospel is one and indivisible, and belongs to God, not to people. Different people only expounded the one good news, or Gospel, given to them by God. There were several such people. But actually four persons are called evangelists: Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. They wrote four Gospels, i.e. presented, each from different points of view and in his own way, a single and general gospel about the one and indivisible Person of the God-man. That is why the Greek Gospel says: according to Matthew, according to Mark, according to Luke and according to John, i.e. one Gospel of God according to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Nothing, of course, prevents us from adding the word Gospel or gospel to these Greek expressions for the sake of clarity, as was done already in ancient times, especially since the titles of the Gospels: according to Matthew, according to Mark, etc., did not belong to the evangelists themselves. Similar expressions were used by the Greeks about other persons who wrote something. So, in Acts 17:28 it says: “as some of your poets have spoken,” and in the literal translation from the Greek: “according to your poets” - and then their own words follow. One of the Church Fathers, Saint Epiphanius of Cyprus, speaks of “the first book of the Pentateuch according to Moses” (ἡ πρώτη βίβλος τῆς κατὰ τὸν Μωυσέα πεντατεύχου ; Epiphanius, Adversus haereses, ed. K. Holl, Epiphanius. [Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller 25] Band 1, Leipzig 1915. liber VIII, 4, p. 190:1), meaning that the Pentateuch was written by Moses himself. In the Bible, the word Gospel means good news (for example, 2 Samuel 18:20, 25 - according to the translation of the Seventy), and in the New Testament the word Gospel is used only about the good news or good news about salvation, about the Savior of the world. Matthew 1:1. Genealogy of Jesus Christ, Son of David, Son of Abraham. The Gospel of Matthew begins with the genealogy of the Savior, which is set out from verse 1 to 17. In the Slavic translation, instead of “genealogy” - “book of kinship”. The Russian and Slavic translations, although accurate, are not literal. In Greek it is “byblos geneseos” (βίβλος γενέσεως). “byblos” means book, and “geneseos” (genitive case; nominative - “genesis” or “genesis”) is a word that is untranslatable both into Russian and into other languages. Therefore, it passed into some languages, including Russian, without translation (genesis). The word “genesis” means not so much birth as “origin”, “emergence” (German: Entstehung). In general it denotes a comparatively slow birth, more the process of birth than the act itself, and the word implies generation, growth and final appearance into the world. Hence the connection between the Hebrew expression with which some genealogies begin (Gen. 2:4–4:26, 5:1–32, 6:9–9:29, 10:1, 11:10, 27) in the Bible, “sefer toledot” (book of births), with the Greek “byblos geneseos”. In Hebrew, the plural is the book of births, and in Greek, the singular is geneseos, because the last word implies not one birth, but a whole series of births. Therefore, to denote the plurality of births, the Greek “genesis” is used in the singular, although it is sometimes found in the plural. Thus, we must recognize our Slavic (“book of kinship”, book of relatives, calculus of clans) and Russian translations, if not completely, then approximately accurate, and admit that it is impossible to translate the Greek (“byblos geneseos”) other than the word “geneasology” for lack of a suitable Russian word. If instead of the word “origin” in Slavic sometimes “being” and sometimes “life” are used, then such an inaccuracy can be explained by the same reason. In what sense are the words “Jesus Christ” used in verse 1? Of course, in the meaning of the proper name of a famous historical Person (and in verse 18 - the word “Christ” without an article), whose life and work the evangelist intended to present to the readers. But was it not enough to call this historical Person simply Jesus? No, because that would be vague. The evangelist wants to present the genealogy of Jesus, who has already become known to both Jews and pagans as Christ and whom he himself recognizes not as a simple person, but as Christ, the Anointed One, the Messiah. Jesus is a Hebrew word converted from Yeshua, which means God the Savior. Same thing in verse 18. This name was common among Jews. Christ, in Hebrew Messiah, means the anointed one or the anointed one. In the Old Testament this name was a common noun. This was the name given to the Jewish kings, priests and prophets who were anointed with sacred oil, or oil. In the New Testament, the name became a proper name (as is usually indicated by the Greek article), but not immediately. According to the interpretation of Blessed Theophylact, the Lord is called Christ because, as a King, He reigned and reigns over sin; as a Priest, he made a sacrifice for us; and He was anointed, like the Lord, with true oil, the Holy Spirit. Having named a well-known historical Person as Christ, the evangelist had to prove His descent from both David and Abraham. The true Christ, or Messiah, had to come from the Jews (to be the seed of Abraham) and was unthinkable for them if he did not come from David and from Abraham. From some Gospel passages it is clear that the Jews not only implied the origin of Christ the Messiah from David, but also His birth in the very city where David was born (see Matt. 2:6). The Jews would not recognize as the Messiah a person who did not descend from David and Abraham. These forefathers were given promises about the Messiah. And the Evangelist Matthew wrote his Gospel primarily, undoubtedly, for the Jews. “Nothing could be more pleasant for a Jew than to tell him that Jesus Christ was a descendant of Abraham and David” (St. John Chrysostom). The prophets prophesied about Christ as the son of David, for example, Isaiah (Isaiah 9:7, 55:3), Jeremiah (Jeremiah 23:5), Ezekiel (Ezekiel 34:23, 37:25), Amos (Amos 9:11), etc. Therefore, having spoken about Christ, or the Messiah, the evangelist immediately says that He was the Son of David, the Son of Abraham - Son in the sense of descendant - so often among the Jews. In the words: “Son of David, Son of Abraham,” both in the Greek Gospel and in the Russian, there is some ambiguity. You can understand these words: Jesus Christ, Who was the Son (descendant) of David, who was (in turn) a descendant of Abraham. But it is also possible: the Son of David and the Son of Abraham. Both interpretations, of course, do not change the essence of the matter at all. If David was the son (descendant) of Abraham, then, of course, Christ, as the Son of David, was a descendant of Abraham. But the first interpretation corresponds more closely to the Greek text. Matthew 1:2. Abraham gave birth to Isaac; Isaac gave birth to Jacob; Jacob begat Judah and his brothers; Having said that Jesus Christ was the Son of David and the Son of Abraham, the evangelist, starting from verse 2, proves this idea in more detail. By naming Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Judah, the evangelist points to famous historical figures to whom promises were given that the Savior of the world would come from them (Gen. 18:18, 22:18, 26:4, 28:14, etc.). Matthew 1:3. Judah fathered Perez and Zerah by Tamar; Perez begat Hezrom; Hezrom begat Aram; Matthew 1:4. Aram gave birth to Abminadab; Amminadab begat Nahshon; Nahshon begat Salmon; Perez and Zerah (Gen. 38:24–30) were twin brothers. Hezrom, Aram, Amminadab and Nahshon were probably all born and lived in Egypt after Jacob and his sons migrated there. Hezrom, Aram, and Amminadab are mentioned in 1 Chronicles 2:1–15 only by name, but nothing special is known. Nahshon's sister Elizabeth married Aaron, Moses' brother. In 1 Chronicles 2:10 and Numbers 2:3 Nahshon is called “prince” or “chief of the sons of Judah.” He was among those involved in numbering the people in the Sinai desert (Num. 1:7), and was the first to offer sacrifice at the erection of the tabernacle (Num. 7:12) approximately forty years before the capture of Jericho. Matthew 1:5. Salmon fathered Boaz by Rahab; Boaz fathered Obed by Ruth; Obed begat Jesse; Nahshon's son, Salmon, was among the spies in Jericho, whom the harlot Rahab hid in her house (Joshua 2:1, 6:24). Salmon married her. According to the evangelist, Boaz was born from this marriage. But the Bible does not say that Rahab was the wife of Salmon (see Ruth.4:13, 21; 1Chron.2:11). From this they conclude that the evangelist, when compiling his genealogy, “had access to information other than the Old Testament books.” The reading of the name Rahab is unsettled and indefinite: Rahab, Rahab, and in Josephus Flavius ​​- Rahab. There are chronological difficulties regarding it. The birth of Obed from Boaz and Ruth is described in detail in the book of Ruth. Ruth was a Moabite, a foreigner, and the Jews hated foreigners. The Evangelist mentions Ruth in order to show that among the Savior’s ancestors there were not only Jews, but also foreigners. From the accounts of Ruth in the Holy Scriptures, it can be concluded that her moral character was very attractive. Matthew 1:6. Jesse begat David king; David the king begot Solomon from Uriah; It is known about Jesse that he had eight sons (1 Samuel 16:1–13), according to 1 Chronicles 2:13–15 – seven. Of these, David was the youngest. Jesse lived in Bethlehem and was the son of an Ephrathite from the tribe of Judah, Obed; During the time of Saul he reached old age and was the eldest among men. During Saul's persecution of David, he was in danger. Speaking about the birth of David from Jesse, the evangelist adds that “Jesse begat David the king.” There is no such increase when mentioning other kings, descendants of David. Perhaps because this was unnecessary, it was enough to call David alone king to show that the generation of kings - the ancestors of the Savior - began with him. David, among others, had sons Solomon and Nathan. Evangelist Matthew leads further genealogy along the line of Solomon, Luke (Luke 3:31) - Nathan. Solomon was the son of David “from who was behind Uriah,” i.e. from such a woman who used to be behind Urie. Details about this are set out in 2 Kings 11 - 2 Kings 12 and are generally known. The Evangelist does not call Bathsheba by name. But the mention of her here serves as an expression of the desire to indicate deviation from the correct order in the genealogy, since David’s marriage to Bathsheba was a crime. Very little is known about Bathsheba. She was the daughter of Ammiel and the wife of Uriah the Hittite and, in all likelihood, was distinguished by many personal merits, if she became the king’s favorite wife and had significant influence on him. Solomon was proclaimed heir to the royal throne at her request. Matthew 1:7. Solomon begat Rehoboam; Rehoboam gave birth to Abijah; Abijah begat Asa; Solomon reigned for forty years (1015–975 BC). Under him, a church was built in Jerusalem. Rehoboam, or Rehoboam, the son of Solomon, reigned in Judah “only over the children of Israel who lived in the cities of Judah” (1 Kings 12:17; 2 Chronicles 10:17). He assumed the throne at the age of 41 and reigned in Jerusalem for 17 years (975–957). After him, his son Abijah ascended the throne and reigned for three years (957–955). After Abijah, his son Asa reigned (955–914). Matthew 1:8. Asa begat Jehoshaphat; Jehoshaphat begat Joram; Jehoram begat Uzziah; After Asa, Jehoshaphat, or Jehoshaphat, his son, reigned for 35 years, and reigned for 25 years (914-889). After Jehoshaphat, Jehoram reigned, age 32, and reigned for 8 years (891–884). After Joram, Matthew finds the passage of three kings - Ahaziah, Joash and Amaziah, who reigned in total from 884 to 810. If this omission was not made by chance, due to a copyist’s error, but intentionally, then the reason for the exclusion of the three named kings from the genealogy should be sought in the fact that the evangelist considered them unworthy to be counted among the heirs of David and the ancestors of Jesus Christ 1 . Matthew 1:9. Uzziah begat Jotham; Jotham begat Ahaz; Ahaz begat Hezekiah; Jehoram's great-grandson Uzziah (810–758) is also called Azariah in the Bible. After Uzziah, Jotham, or Jotham, his son, reigned for 25 years, and reigned in Jerusalem for 16 years (758-742). After Jotham, his son Ahaz, 20 years old, ascended the throne and reigned in Jerusalem for 16 years (742–727). Matthew 1:10. Hezekiah begat Manasseh; Manasseh begat Amon; Amon gave birth to Josiah; After Ahaz, Hezekiah his son reigned and reigned for 29 years (727-698). After Hezekiah, his son Manasseh, 12 years old, ascended the throne and reigned for 50 years (698–643). After Manasseh, his son Ammon, or Amon, reigned (in the Gospel of Matthew, according to some manuscripts, Sinai, Vatican, etc., one should read Amos, but in other, no less authoritative, but numerous manuscripts - Amon), 22 years old, and reigned for two years (643-641). Matthew 1:11. Josiah begat Joachim; Joachim gave birth to Jehoiachin and his brothers before moving to Babylon. Josiah ascended the throne at age 8 and reigned for 31 years (641–610). After Josiah, his son Jehoahaz reigned for only three months, the wicked king, whom “the people of the earth” reigned (2 Kings 23:30). But the king of Egypt deposed him. Since Joahaz was not one of the Savior’s ancestors, the evangelist does not mention him. Instead of Jehoahaz, his brother Eliakim, 25 years old, was elevated to the throne, and reigned in Jerusalem for 11 years (610-599). The Babylonian king, Nebuchadnezzar, subjugated Eliakim and changed his name to Joachim. After him, his son Jehoiachin (or Joachin), 18 years old, reigned and reigned for only three months (in 599). During his reign, Nebuchadnezzar, the king of Babylon, approached Jerusalem, besieged the city, and Jehoiachin went out to the king of Babylon with his mother, servants and princes. The king of Babylon took him and moved him to Babylon, and in his place he installed Mattaniah, Jehoiachin's uncle, and changed Mattaniah's name to Zedekiah. Since the evangelist leads the further line from Jeconiah and after the resettlement to Babylon, there was no need to mention Zedekiah. After moving to Babylon, Jeconiah was imprisoned and stayed in it for 37 years. After this, Evilmerodach, the new king of Babylon, in the year of his accession brought Jehoiachin out of the prison house, spoke to him friendly and set his throne above the throne of the kings who were in Babylon. Jeconiah ended the period of the kings of Judah, which lasted more than 450 years. Simple as verse 11 is, its interpretation presents insurmountable and almost insurmountable difficulties. In the Greek text, and precisely in the best manuscripts, it is different from the Russian: “Josiah gave birth to Jehoiachin (and not Joachim)... during (during) the Babylonian migration,” i.e. to Babylon. Further in verse 12 it is the same as in Russian. It is assumed that the words of the Russian translation: “Josiah begat Joachim; Joachim begat Jehoiachin” (in italics) is an insertion into the original words of Matthew, although very ancient, already known to Irenaeus in the 2nd century AD, but still an insertion, originally made in the margins in order to agree on the genealogy of Matthew with the Old Testament scriptures, and then to answer the pagans, who reproached Christians for missing the name of Joachim in the Gospel. If the mention of Joachim is genuine, then it is easy to see (from the Russian translation) that from Solomon to Jehoiachin there were not 14 generations or generations, but 15, which contradicts the testimony of the evangelist in the 17th verse. To explain this omission and restore the correct reading of the 11th verse, one should pay attention to the following. In 1 Chronicles 3:15–17, the sons of King Josiah are listed as follows: “the firstborn Jehoahaz, the second Jehoiakim, the third Zedekiah, the fourth Shallum.” From this it is clear that Joachim had three brothers. Further: “the sons of Joachim: Jehoiachin his son, Zedekiah his son.” This shows that Jeconiah had only one brother. Finally: “the sons of Jehoiachin: Asher, Shealphiel,” etc. Here the gospel genealogy almost coincides with the genealogy of the 1st book of Chronicles. In 2 Kings 24:17 Mattaniah or Zedekiah is called Jehoiachin's uncle. Having carefully examined these testimonies, we see that Josiah had a son (second) Joachim, he had several brothers, about whom the evangelist does not speak, but speaks about the brothers of Jeconiah, while according to 1 Chronicles 3:16 the latter had only one brother, Zedekiah, which does not agree with the testimony of the evangelist Matthew. Therefore, it is assumed that there were two Jehoiachins, Jehoiachin the first, who was also called Joachim, and Jehoiachin the second. Jehoiachin the first was originally called Eliakim, then the king of Babylon changed his name to Joachim. The reason why he was named Jehoiachin was explained back in ancient times (Jerome) by the fact that the scribe could easily confuse Joachin with Joachim, changing “x” to “k” and “n” to “m”. The name Joachin can easily be read: Jehoiachin in Hebrew, due to the complete similarity of the consonant letters used in both names. Accepting this interpretation, we must read the 11th verse of the Gospel of Matthew as follows: “Josiah begat Jeconiah (otherwise Eliakim, Joachim) and his brothers” and so on; verse 12: “The second Jehoiachin begat Shealtiel” and so on. It is objected to this interpretation that such a designation of clans contradicts the customs observed in the genealogy. If the above interpretation were correct, then the evangelist would have to express it this way: “Josiah begat the first Jehoiachin, the first Jehoiachin begat the second Jehoiachin, the second Jehoiachin begat Shealtiel,” etc. This difficulty, apparently, is not resolved by the assumption that “the names of father and son are so similar that they were accidentally identified or confused when reproduced in Greek.” In view of this, other commentators, to resolve this difficulty, suggest that the original reading of verse 11 was: “Josiah begat Jehoiakim and his brothers; Joachim gave birth to Jehoiachin during the Babylonian migration.” This last interpretation is better. Although it, due to the rearrangement of the words “and his brothers,” does not agree with the existing Greek text of the Gospel of Matthew, confirmed by ancient and important manuscripts, it can be assumed that the rearrangement was made by mistake by the ancient scribes. In support of the latter interpretation, it can be pointed out that the existing Greek text, i.e., as stated above, “Josiah begat Jehoiachin and his brothers during (in the Russian translation - “before”) the Babylonian migration,” cannot be accepted without some kind of changes and rearrangements and is clearly erroneous, because Josiah did not live during the Babylonian migration or during it, but 20 years before that. As for Jer. 22:30, where it is said about Joachim: “Thus says the Lord: Write down this man destitute of children, an ill-fated man in his days,” then the words “deprived of children” are explained by the subsequent expressions of the prophet, from which it is clear that the children of Joachim will not “sit on the throne of David and rule in Judea.” It is in this last sense that the expression “deprived of children” should be understood. Matthew 1:12. After moving to Babylon, Jeconiah gave birth to Salathiel; Shealtiel begat Zerubbabel; Shelatiel is mentioned among the sons of Jeconiah in 1 Chronicles 3:17. But according to 1 Chronicles 3:18–19, Jehoiachin also had a son, Pedaiah, and it was to him that Zerubbabel was born. Thus, in the Gospel of Matthew here again, apparently, there is an omission - Pedaiah. Meanwhile, in many other places in the Holy Scriptures and in Josephus, Zerubbabel is called the son of Shealtiel (1 Ezra 3:2; Neh. 12:1; Hagg. 1:1, 12, 2:2, 23; Josephus, “Antiquities of the Jews.” St. Petersburg, 1900, book XI, chapter 3, 1 (reprint: Moscow, 1994, vol. 1, p. 442) etc.). To explain this difficulty, it is assumed that Fedaia, according to the law of life, took the wife of the deceased Salafiel for himself, and thus the children of Fedaia became, by law, the children of Salafiel, his brother. Matthew 1:13. Zerubbabel begat Abihu; Abihu begat Eliakim; Eliakim begat Azor; Matthew 1:14. Azor begat Zadok; Zadok gave birth to Achim; Achim begat Eliud; Matthew 1:15. Elihu begat Eleazar; Eleazar begat Matthan; Matthan gave birth to Jacob; According to 1 Chronicles 3:19 et seq. Abihu is not among the sons and grandsons of Zerubbabel. Based on the similarity of Hebrew and Greek names, it is assumed that Abihu is identical with Godavihu 1 Chronicles 3:24 and Judah Luke 3:26. If so, then in the 13th verse of the Gospel of Matthew there is again an omission. The genealogy in the indicated place in the book of Chronicles is stated as follows: Zerubbabel, Hananiah, Isaiah, Shechaniah, Neariah, Elioenai, Godaviahu. Although the addition of six persons to such a gap would bring the genealogy of Matthew closer to the genealogy of Luke in terms of the number of genera, with a complete difference in names, the identification of Abihu with Godaviahu is very doubtful. However, some newer interpreters accept this explanation. Nothing is known about the persons after Zerubbabel and, perhaps, Abihu, mentioned in verses 13–15, either from the Old Testament, or from the writings of Josephus, or from the Talmudic and other writings. One can only note that this contradicts the opinion according to which the evangelist compiled the genealogy of the Savior using the Bible alone, or at least does not confirm this opinion. Matthew 1:16. Jacob begat Joseph, the husband of Mary, from whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ. According to the evangelists Matthew and Luke, the genealogies clearly refer to Joseph. But Matthew calls Jacob the father of Joseph, and Luke calls Elijah (Luke 3:23). And according to legend, the father and mother of Mary were Joachim and Anna. The Savior, according to the clear narrative of Matthew and Luke (Luke 1:26, 2:5), was not the son of Joseph. Why, then, did the evangelists need to compile and place in their Gospels the genealogy of Christ, which in fact did not relate to Him? Most interpreters explain this circumstance by the fact that Matthew traces his genealogy through the ancestors of Joseph, wanting to show that Jesus was not his own, but the legitimate Son of Joseph and, therefore, the heir to his rights and privileges as a descendant of David. Luke, if in his genealogy he also mentions Joseph, then in reality he sets out the genealogy of Mary. This opinion was first expressed by the church writer Julius Africanus (III century), an excerpt from whose work was placed in Eusebius’s “Ecclesiastical History” (1, 7), with changes repeated in the interpretation of the Gospel of Luke by Ambrose of Milan and was known to Irenaeus (Irenaeus Lugdunensis, Adversus haereses, liber 3:32). Matthew 1:17. So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; and from David to the deportation to Babylon, fourteen generations; and from the migration to Babylon to Christ there are fourteen generations. The word "all" refers most closely to the generations counted by Matthew from Abraham to David. In subsequent expressions of the verse, when calculating further generations, the evangelist does not repeat this word. Therefore, the simplest explanation of the word “all” seems to be the following. The Evangelist says: “all” that I have indicated in this genealogy, “the generations from Abraham to David” and so on. The number 14 was hardly sacred among the Jews, although it was composed of the repeated sacred number 7. One might think that the evangelist, having counted fourteen genera from Abraham to David, as well as from Jeconiah to Christ, wanted to show some roundness and correctness in the calculation of genera, which is why he accepted the number 14 for the middle (royal) period of his genealogy, releasing some genera for this purpose. This technique is somewhat artificial, but it is quite consistent with the customs and thinking of the Jews. Something similar occurs in Gen. 5:3 et seq.; Genesis 11:10 et seq., where from Adam to Noah and from Noah to Abraham there are counted up to 10 generations. By “generations” we mean generations – from father to son. Thus, the genealogy of Christ according to Matthew can be presented as follows: I. Abraham. Isaac. Jacob. Judas. Fares. Yesrom. Aram. Aminadab. Naasson. Salmon. Boaz. Ovid. Jesse. David. II. Solomon. Rehoboam. Aviya. Asa. Jehoshaphat. Joram. Uzziah. Jotham. Ahaz. Hezekiah. Manasseh. Amon (Amos). Josiah. Joachim. III. Jeconiah. Salafiel. Zerubbabel. Abihu. Eliakim. Azor. Zadok. Achim. Eliud. Eleazar. Matthan. Jacob. Joseph. Jesus Christ. Matthew 1:18. The Nativity of Jesus Christ was like this: after the betrothal of His Mother Mary to Joseph, before they were united, it turned out that She was pregnant with the Holy Spirit. At the beginning of this verse, the evangelist uses the same word as at the beginning of verse 1 - “genesis.” In Russian and Slavic this word is now translated by the word "Christmas". The translation is again inaccurate due to the lack of a suitable Russian word. In its proper sense, it would be better to translate this: “the origin of Jesus Christ (from the Virgin Mary) was like this.” The wedding rites of the Jews were somewhat similar to ours, which occur with the blessing of the bride and groom. A betrothal agreement was drawn up or a solemn verbal promise was given in the presence of witnesses that such and such a person would marry such and such a bride. Upon betrothal, the bride was considered the betrothed wife of her groom. Their union could only be destroyed by a proper divorce. But between betrothal and marriage, as with us, sometimes whole months passed (see Deut. 20:7). “Mary” is a Greek name, in Aramaic – Mariam, and in Hebrew – Miriam, or Miriam, derived from the Hebrew word “meri” - “stubbornness, obstinacy”, or from “rum” - “to be exalted, high.” According to Blessed Jerome, this name means domina (“mistress.” – Ed.). All productions are questionable. “Before they were combined,” i.e. before the actual wedding took place. Whether Joseph and Mary lived in the same house after their betrothal is unknown. According to St. John Chrysostom, “Mary was already living in his (Joseph’s) house.” But the expression, “Do not be afraid to receive Mary your wife” (verse 20), seems to show that Joseph and Mary did not live in the same house. Other interpreters agree with Chrysostom. “It turned out,” became noticeable to strangers. "From the Holy Spirit". All the circumstances about which the evangelist speaks, which are distinguished by their miraculous character, are incomprehensible to us (cf. Luke 3:22; Acts 1:16; Eph.4:30). Matthew 1:19. Joseph, Her husband, being righteous and not wanting to make Her public, wanted to secretly let Her go. “Her husband” - the word “husband”, according to a literal translation from Greek, literally means husband, not betrothed. But it is clear that the evangelist uses this word in the sense of a protector, patron, and perhaps even betrothed. Otherwise there would be an obvious contradiction in his own narrative. In the Holy Scriptures, the words “husband” and “wife” are sometimes used not in the sense of spouses. “Being righteous” – Heb. "tzaddik". This was the name given to pious people who always tried to fulfill the provisions of the law. Why Joseph is called this way is clear. Seeing that Mary was pregnant, he thought that She had done something bad, and since the law punished bad deeds, Joseph also intended to punish Mary, although this punishment, due to his kindness, should have been light. The word “righteous,” however, does not mean “kind” or “loving.” In the Gospel one can clearly observe the struggle of feelings in Joseph’s soul: on the one hand, he was righteous, and on the other, he treated Mary with pity. According to the law, he had to use power and punish Her, but out of love for Her he did not want to make Her public, i.e. glorify, tell others about Her and then, on the basis of his announcement or story, demand the punishment of Mary. The word “righteous” is not explained by the expression “not willing”; this last one is an additional and special participle (in Greek - participle). Joseph was a strict guardian of the law and, moreover, did not want to denounce Mary. The word “pronounce” is read differently in Greek. 1. According to one reading, “to make public” (δειγματίσαι) should be explained as follows: to set an example, to expose for the sake of an example. The word is rare, not used among the Greeks, but in the New Testament it is found only in Col. 2:15. It can be equivalent to the expression: “just let go.” 2. In many other manuscripts a stronger word is used, meaning - to shame or endanger, to make public in order to bring something bad, to put to death as a woman who has not proven faithful (παραδειγματίσαι). “Wanted” - here in Greek a different word is used, not “not wanting” - means a decision, a desire to put one’s intention into action. The Greek word translated "to let go" means "to be divorced." The divorce could be secret or open. The first was carried out in the presence of only two witnesses, without explaining the reasons for the divorce. The second - solemnly and with an explanation of the reasons for the divorce in court. Joseph set out to do the first thing. “Secretly” can also mean secret negotiations here, without a letter of divorce. This, of course, was illegal (Deut. 24:1), but the divorce letter, even if it were secret, would contradict the word “secretly” used in the Gospel. Matthew 1:20. But when he thought this, behold, the Angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said: Joseph, son of David! Do not be afraid to accept Mary your wife, for what is born in Her is from the Holy Spirit; “But when Joseph thought this,” in the word “thought” in the Greek. hesitation and doubt and even suffering are implied - “behold, the Angel of the Lord...”. The word "se", in Russian - "here", is used mainly in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke and gives special power to the speech that follows it. The reader or listener is invited to pay special attention here. Next, the evangelist tells how Joseph’s doubts and hesitations were eliminated. During the Annunciation, the Angel of the Lord appeared to the Virgin Mary in reality, because on Her part a conscious attitude to the Angel’s gospel and consent was required; the gospel of the Angel of Mary related to the future and was supreme. To communicate the Divine will to Joseph, an Angel appears in a dream, choosing sleep as a tool or means, and, moreover, less perfect than waking vision. The gospel to Joseph did not have the same meaning as the gospel to Mary; it was simply a warning. “Angel” means a messenger, a messenger, but here of course it is not a simple messenger, but “the Lord’s.” As can be concluded from the Gospel of Luke, it was Archangel Gabriel. He told Joseph in a dream ("Joseph, son of David" - nominatives instead of vocatives in Greek) not to be afraid to accept Mary his wife. “Don’t be afraid” here means: don’t hesitate to do anything. “Receive” - the interpretation of this word depends on whether Mary was in Joseph’s house or outside it. If she was, then “accept” would mean the restoration of Her rights as a betrothed; if she was not, then, in addition to this restoration, the word will also mean Her acceptance into the house of Joseph from the house of Her father or relative. “Your wife” does not mean “like your wife.” The reason why Joseph had to accept Mary was “born in her”, i.e. A baby that has not yet been born or has been born, but has just been conceived, and therefore neuter. From the time of the dream, Joseph was to become the guardian and patron of both the Mother and the Baby. Matthew 1:21. She will give birth to a Son, and you will call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins. “She will give birth to a Son” - the verb (τέξεται) is used the same as in verse 25, indicating the act of birth itself (cf. Gen. 17:19; Luke 1:13). The verb γεννάω is used only when it is necessary to indicate the origin of children from the father. “And you will name” - (so in Greek; in Slavic and some Russian editions - “will name”) instead of nareki, name, future instead of imperative, it is also used in our country to express softened orders, sometimes not at all different in form from the imperative (write, learn, look, look, etc.). “For He will save His people from their sins.” He, precisely He, He alone, will save His people (Greek), i.e. a known people belonging to Him and not to anyone else. First of all, the Jewish people are understood here - this is how Joseph could understand these words; then people from every nation. However, from the Jewish and from other nations, only those persons who are His followers, believe in Him, belong to Him. “From their sins” (Greek - his, i.e. the people) - not from punishment for sins, but from the sins themselves - a very important remark, indicating the authenticity of Matthew's Gospel. At the very beginning of the Gospel gospel, when the subsequent activity of Christ has not yet become clear and determined, it is indicated that Jesus Christ will save His people from their sins, not from worldly submission to secular authority, but precisely from sins, crimes against the commandments of God. Here we have a clear indication of the nature of the future "spiritual activity of Christ." Matthew 1:22. And all this happened, that what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet might be fulfilled, saying: It is not known whose words are stated in this verse, the Angel or the Evangelist. According to St. John Chrysostom, “worthy of a miracle and worthy of himself, the Angel exclaimed when he spoke.” That is, according to Chrysostom, the Angel “sends Joseph to Isaiah, so that, having awakened, even if he forgets his words, as if they were completely new, having been nourished by Scripture, he would remember the prophetic words, and at the same time bring his words to memory.” This opinion is also supported by some of the newest interpreters on the grounds that if these words were considered to belong to the evangelist, then the Angel’s speech would seem unclear and unfinished. Matthew 1:23. Behold, the Virgin will be with child and give birth to a Son, and they will call His name Immanuel, which means: God is with us. The words cited by the Angel (or, in another opinion, by the evangelist himself) are found in the prophet Isaiah (Is. 7:14). They are given with minor deviations from the translation of the Seventy, which were spoken by Isaiah to the Jewish king Ahaz on the occasion of the invasion of Judea by the Syrian and Israeli kings. The words of the prophet most closely pointed to contemporary circumstances. The word "Virgin" used in the Hebrew text and Greek translation literally means a virgin who gave birth to a son naturally and from her husband (see Is. 8:3, where the same virgin is called a prophetess). But then the prophet’s thought expands, he begins to contemplate future events that will occur with a complete change in his contemporary circumstances - instead of the invasion of the Israeli and Syrian kings, the Assyrian king will subjugate Judea. He “will go through Judea, flood it and rise high, reaching up to the neck; and the spread of her wings will be throughout the entire breadth of Your land, Immanuel” (Is.8:8)! If in the first prophecy one should understand an ordinary virgin, an ordinary birth and an ordinary Jewish boy named Immanuel, then in Is. 8:8, by this name, as can be seen from the words of the prophet, God Himself is called. Although the prophecy did not refer to the Messiah in the Talmudic writings, it can clearly be seen that it has a higher meaning. The Messianic application of prophecy was made for the first time in the Gospel of Matthew. If the words of verse 23 were the words of the Angel, then the expression “what does it mean” and so on should be attributed to the evangelist himself. This is a common Greek expression showing that a Hebrew word or words are translated or interpreted when translated from Hebrew into Greek. According to some interpreters, the expression "what means" serves as evidence that the Gospel of Matthew was originally written not in Hebrew, but in Greek. On the other hand, they said that when the Gospel was translated into Greek, the expression had already been inserted at that time either by the translator or by the evangelist himself. Matthew 1:24. Rising from sleep, Joseph did as the Angel of the Lord commanded him, and received his wife, When Joseph woke up from sleep, he did as the Angel of the Lord commanded (in fact, destined, established, determined) for him. Matthew 1:25. and did not know Her. [How] at last She gave birth to Her firstborn Son, and he called His name Jesus. In this verse, it is necessary to explain first of all the words “as finally”, literally “until”, in the Slavic translation - “dondezhe”, until (ἕως οὗ). According to ancient and new interpreters, this word does not have the same meaning: “before, therefore after” (cf. Gen. 8:7; Ps. 89:3, etc.). The correct explanation of this verse is this: the evangelist speaks only about the time “before” the birth of the Child, and does not speak or discuss the subsequent time. In general, “what happened after birth is left to you to judge for yourself” (St. John Chrysostom). The word "firstborn" is missing from the Sinaiticus and Vatican manuscripts. But in other manuscripts, less important, but numerous, this word was added. It is found in the Gospel of Luke (Luke 2:7), where there are no discrepancies. It means both the first and the last, but not always. In some cases, the first son, followed by others. “He called” – this expression refers to Joseph. He named the Child according to the command of the Angel and by virtue of his authority as a legal, although not natural, father (cf. Luke 1:62–63). According to popular ideas, neither in the kingdom of Judah nor in the kingdom of Israel did wickedness and unrest ever reach such a development as in the time of Ahab, with whose house the kings Ahaziah, Joash and Amaziah had connections through Athaliah. You might be interested in: