7

CHAPTER 7.

GABRIEL'S ANNUNCIATION OF JOHN AND OF JESUS.


JOHN THE FORERUNNER.


Associated with the prophecies of the birth of Christ are predictions
concerning one who should precede Him, going before to prepare the way.
It is not surprizing that the annunciation of the immediate advent of
the forerunner was speedily followed by that of the Messiah; nor that
the proclamations were made by the same heavenly embassador--Gabriel,
sent from the presence of God.[186]

About fifteen months prior to the Savior's birth, Zacharias, a priest of
the Aaronic order, was officiating in the functions of his office in the
temple at Jerusalem. His wife, Elisabeth, was also of a priestly family,
being numbered among the descendants of Aaron. The couple had never been
blessed with children; and at the time of which we speak they were both
well stricken in years and had sorrowfully given up hope of posterity.
Zacharias belonged to the course of priests named after Abijah, and
known in later time as the course of Abia. This was the eighth in the
order of the twenty-four courses established by David the king, each
course being appointed to serve in turn a week at the sanctuary.[187] It
will be remembered that on the return of the people from Babylon only
four of the courses were represented; but of these four each averaged
over fourteen hundred men.[188]

During his week of service each priest was required to maintain
scrupulously a state of ceremonial cleanliness of person; he had to
abstain from wine, and from food except that specifically prescribed; he
had to bathe frequently; he lived within the temple precincts and thus
was cut off from family association; he was not allowed to come near the
dead, nor to mourn in the formal manner if death should rob him of even
his nearest and dearest of kin. We learn that the daily selection of the
priest who should enter the Holy Place, and there burn incense on the
golden altar, was determined by lot;[189] and furthermore we gather,
from non-scriptural history, that because of the great number of priests
the honor of so officiating seldom fell twice to the same person.

On this day the lot had fallen to Zacharias. It was a very solemn
occasion in the life of the humble Judean priest--this one day in his
life on which the special and particularly sacred service was required
of him. Within the Holy Place he was separated by the veil of the temple
only from the Oracle or Holy of Holies--the inner sanctuary into which
none but the high priest might enter, and he only on the Day of
Atonement, after long ceremonial preparation.[190] The place and the
time were conducive to the highest and most reverential feelings. As
Zacharias ministered within the Holy Place, the people without bowed
themselves in prayer, watching for the clouds of incense smoke to appear
above the great partition which formed the barrier between the place of
general assembly and the Holy Place, and awaiting the reappearance of
the priest and his pronouncement of the benediction.

Before the astonished gaze of Zacharias, at this supreme moment of his
priestly service, there appeared, standing on the right of the golden
altar of incense, an angel of the Lord. Many generations had passed in
Jewry since any visible presence other than mortal had been manifest
within the temple, either in the Holy Place or the Holy of Holies; the
people regarded personal visitations of heavenly beings as occurrences
of the past; they had come almost to believe that there were no longer
prophets in Israel. Nevertheless, there was always a feeling of anxiety,
akin to that of troubled expectancy, whenever a priest approached the
inner sanctuary, which was regarded as the particular abode of Jehovah
should He ever again condescend to visit His people. In view of these
conditions we read without surprize that this angelic presence troubled
Zacharias and caused fear to fall upon him. The words of the heavenly
visitant, however, were comforting though of startling import, embodying
as they did the unqualified assurance that the man's prayers had been
heard, and that his wife should bear him a son, who must be named
John.[191] The promise went even further, specifying that the child to
be born of Elisabeth would be a blessing to the people; many would
rejoice at his birth; he would be great in the sight of the Lord, and
must be guarded against wine and strong drink;[192] he would be filled
with the Holy Ghost, would be the means of turning many souls to God,
and would go before to make ready a people prepared to receive the
Messiah.

Doubtless Zacharias recognised in the predicted future of the yet unborn
child the great forerunner, of whom the prophets had told and the
psalmist had sung; but that such a one should be offspring of himself
and his aged wife seemed impossible despite the angel's promise. The man
doubted, and asked whereby he should know that what his visitant had
spoken was true: "And the angel answering said unto him, I am Gabriel,
that stand in the presence of God; and am sent to speak unto thee, and
to show thee these glad tidings. And, behold, thou shalt be dumb, and
not able to speak, until the day that these things shall be performed,
because thou believest not my words, which shall be fulfilled in their
season."[193] When the highly blessed though sorely smitten priest at
length came from within and appeared before the expectant congregation,
already made anxious by his delayed return, he could but mutely dismiss
the assembly and by signs indicate that he had seen a vision. The
penalty for doubt was already operative; Zacharias was dumb.

In due time the child was born, there in the hill country of Judea[194]
where Zacharias and Elisabeth had their home; and, on the eighth day
following the birth the family assembled in accordance with custom and
Mosaic requirement, to name the babe in connection with the rite of
circumcision.[195] All suggestions that he be called after his father
were overruled by Zacharias, who wrote with decisive finality: "His name
is John." Thereupon the dumb[196] priest's tongue was loosed, and being
filled with the Holy Ghost he burst forth in prophecy, praise and song;
his inspired utterances have been set to music and are sung in worship
by many Christian congregations as the Benedictus:

"Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he hath visited and
redeemed his people, and hath raised up an horn of salvation for
us in the house of his servant David; as he spake by the mouth
of his holy prophets, which have been since the world began:
that we should be saved from our enemies, and from the hand of
all that hate us; to perform the mercy promised to our fathers,
and to remember his holy covenant; the oath which he sware to
our father Abraham, that he would grant unto us, that we being
delivered out of the hand of our enemies might serve him without
fear, in holiness and righteousness before him, all the days of
our life. And thou, child, shalt be called the prophet of the
Highest: for thou shalt go before the face of the Lord to
prepare his ways; to give knowledge of salvation unto his people
by the remission of their sins, through the tender mercy of our
God; whereby the dayspring from on high hath visited us, to give
light to them that sit in darkness and in the shadow of death,
to guide our feet into the way of peace."[197]

The last words Zacharias had uttered prior to the infliction of dumbness
were words of doubt and unbelief, words in which he had called for a
sign as proof of authority of one who came from the presence of the
Almighty; the words with which he broke his long silence were words of
praise unto God in whom he had all assurance, words that were as a sign
to all who heard, and the fame whereof spread throughout the region.

The unusual circumstances attending the birth of John, notably the
months of dumbness passed by the father and his sudden recovery of
speech on the bestowal of the fore-appointed name, caused many to marvel
and some to fear, as they asked: "What manner of child shall this be?"
When, a man grown, John raised his voice in the wilderness, again in
fulfillment of prophecy, the people questioned as to whether he was not
the Messiah.[198] Of his life between infancy and the beginning of his
public ministry, a period of approximately thirty years, we have of
record but a single sentence: "And the child grew, and waxed strong in
spirit, and was in the deserts till the day of his shewing unto
Israel."[199]


THE ANNUNCIATION TO THE VIRGIN.

Six months after the visitation of Gabriel to Zacharias, and three
months prior to the birth of John, the same heavenly messenger was sent
to a young woman named Mary, who lived at Nazareth, a town in Galilee.
She was of the lineage of David; and though unmarried was betrothed or
espoused to a man named Joseph, who also was of royal descent through
the Davidic line. The angel's salutation, while full of honor and
blessing, caused Mary to wonder and to feel troubled. "Hail, thou that
art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among
women";[200] thus did Gabriel greet the virgin.

In common with other daughters of Israel, specifically those of the
tribe of Judah and of known descent from David, Mary had doubtless
contemplated, with holy joy and ecstasy, the coming of the Messiah
through the royal line; she knew that some Jewish maiden was yet to
become the mother of the Christ. Was it possible that the angel's words
to her had reference to this supreme expectation and hope of the nation?
She had little time to turn these things in her mind, for the angel
continued: "Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God. And,
behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and
shalt call his name JESUS. He shall be great, and shall be called the
Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of
his father David: and he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever;
and of his kingdom there shall be no end."[201]

Even yet she comprehended but in part the import of this momentous
visitation. Not in the spirit of doubt such as had prompted Zacharias to
ask for a sign, but through an earnest desire for information and
explanation, Mary, conscious of her unmarried status and sure of her
virgin condition, asked: "How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?"
The answer to her natural and simple inquiry was the announcement of a
miracle such as the world had never known--not a miracle in the sense of
a happening contrary to nature's law, nevertheless a miracle through the
operation of higher law, such as the human mind ordinarily fails to
comprehend or regard as possible. Mary was informed that she would
conceive and in time bring forth a Son, of whom no mortal man would be
the father:--"And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost
shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow
thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall
be called the Son of God."[202]

Then the angel told her of the blessed condition of her cousin
Elisabeth, who had been barren; and by way of sufficient and final
explanation added: "For with God nothing shall be impossible." With
gentle submissiveness and humble acceptance, the pure young virgin
replied: "Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to
thy word."

His message delivered, Gabriel departed, leaving the chosen Virgin of
Nazareth to ponder over her wondrous experience. Mary's promised Son was
to be "The Only Begotten" of the Father in the flesh; so it had been
both positively and abundantly predicted. True, the event was
unprecedented; true also it has never been paralleled; but that the
virgin birth would be unique was as truly essential to the fulfilment of
prophecy as that it should occur at all. That Child to be born of Mary
was begotten of Elohim, the Eternal Father, not in violation of natural
law but in accordance with a higher manifestation thereof; and, the
offspring from that association of supreme sanctity, celestial Sireship,
and pure though mortal maternity, was of right to be called the "Son of
the Highest." In His nature would be combined the powers of Godhood with
the capacity and possibilities of mortality; and this through the
ordinary operation of the fundamental law of heredity, declared of God,
demonstrated by science, and admitted by philosophy, that living beings
shall propagate--after their kind. The Child Jesus was to inherit the
physical, mental, and spiritual traits, tendencies, and powers that
characterized His parents--one immortal and glorified--God, the other
human--woman.

Jesus Christ was to be born of mortal woman, but was not directly the
offspring of mortal man, except so far as His mother was the daughter of
both man and woman. In our Lord alone has been fulfilled the word of God
spoken in relation to the fall of Adam, that the _seed of the woman_
should have power to overcome Satan by bruising the serpent's head.[203]

In respect to place, condition, and general environment, Gabriel's
annunciation to Zacharias offers strong contrast to the delivery of his
message to Mary. The prospective forerunner of the Lord was announced to
his father within the magnificent temple, and in a place the most
exclusively sacred save one other in the Holy House, under the light
shed from the golden candlestick, and further illumined by the glow of
living coals on the altar of gold; the Messiah was announced to His
mother in a small town far from the capital and the temple, most
probably within the walls of a simple Galilean cottage.


MARY'S VISIT TO HER COUSIN ELISABETH.

It was natural that Mary, left now to herself with a secret in her soul,
holier, greater, and more thrilling than any ever borne before or since,
should seek companionship, and that of some one of her own sex, in whom
she could confide, from whom she might hope to derive comfort and
support, and to whom it would be not wrong to tell what at that time was
probably known to no mortal save herself. Her heavenly visitant had
indeed suggested all this in his mention of Elisabeth, Mary's cousin,
herself a subject of unusual blessing, and a woman through whom another
miracle of God had been wrought. Mary set out with haste from Nazareth
for the hill country of Judea, on a journey of about a hundred miles if
the traditional account be true that the little town of Juttah was the
home of Zacharias. There was mutual joy in the meeting between Mary the
youthful virgin, and Elisabeth, already well advanced in life. From what
of Gabriel's words her husband had communicated, Elisabeth must have
known that the approaching birth of her son would soon be followed by
that of the Messiah, and that therefore the day for which Israel had
waited and prayed through the long dark centuries was about to dawn.
When Mary's salutation fell upon her ears, the Holy Ghost bore witness
that the chosen mother of the Lord stood before her in the person of her
cousin; and as she experienced the physical thrill incident to the
quickening spirit of her own blessed conception, she returned the
greeting of her visitor with reverence: "Blessed art thou among women,
and blessed is the fruit of thy womb. And whence is this to me, that the
mother of my Lord should come to me?"[204] Mary responded with that
glorious hymn of praise, since adopted in the musical ritual of churches
as the Magnificat:

"My soul doth magnify the Lord, and my spirit hath rejoiced in
God my Saviour. For he hath regarded the low estate of his
handmaiden: for, behold, from henceforth all generations shall
call me blessed. For he that is mighty hath done to me great
things; and holy is his name. And his mercy is on them that fear
him from generation to generation. He hath shewed strength with
his arm; he hath scattered the proud in the imagination of their
hearts. He hath put down the mighty from their seats, and
exalted them of low degree. He hath filled the hungry with good
things; and the rich he hath sent empty away. He hath holpen his
servant Israel, in remembrance of his mercy; as he spake to our
fathers, to Abraham, and to his seed for ever."[205]


MARY AND JOSEPH.

The visit lasted about three months, after which time Mary returned to
Nazareth. The real embarrassment of her position she had now to meet. At
the home of her cousin she had been understood; her condition had served
to confirm the testimony of Zacharias and Elisabeth; but how would her
word be received at her own home? And especially, how would she be
regarded by her espoused husband?[206] Betrothal, or espousal, in that
time was in some respects as binding as the marriage vow, and could only
be set aside by a ceremonial separation akin to divorce; yet an espousal
was but an engagement to marry, not a marriage. When Joseph greeted his
promised bride after her three months' absence, he was greatly
distressed over the indications of her prospective maternity. Now the
Jewish law provided for the annulment of a betrothal in either of two
ways--by public trial and judgment, or by private agreement attested by
a written document signed in the presence of witnesses. Joseph was a
just man, a strict observer of the law, yet no harsh extremist; moreover
he loved Mary and would save her all unnecessary humiliation, whatever
might be his own sorrow and suffering. For Mary's sake he dreaded the
thought of publicity; and therefore determined to have the espousal
annulled with such privacy the law allowed. He was troubled and thought
much of his duty in the matter, when, "behold, the angel of the Lord
appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear
not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her
is of the Holy Ghost. And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt
call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins."[207]

Great was Joseph's relief of mind; and great his joy in the realization
that the long predicted coming of the Messiah was at hand; the words of
the prophets would be fulfilled; a virgin, and she the one in the world
most dear to him, had conceived, and in due time would bring forth that
blessed Son, Emmanuel, which name by interpretation means "God with
us."[208] The angel's salutation was significant; "Joseph, thou son of
David," was the form of address; and the use of that royal title must
have meant to Joseph that, though he was of kingly lineage, marriage
with Mary would cast no shadow upon his family status. Joseph waited
not; to insure Mary all possible protection and establish his full legal
right as her lawful guardian he hastened the solemnization of the
marriage, and "did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took
unto him his wife: and knew her not till she had brought forth her
firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS."[209]

The national hope of a Messiah based on promise and prophecy had become
confused in the Jewish mind, through the influence of rabbinism with its
many vagaries, and its "private interpretation"[210] made to appear
authoritative by the artificially sustained prestige of the expositors;
yet certain conditions had been emphasized as essential, even by the
rabbis, and by these essentials would be judged the claim of any Jew who
might declare himself to be the long expected One. It was beyond
question that the Messiah was to be born within the tribe of Judah and
through the line of descent from David, and, being of David He must of
necessity be of the lineage of Abraham, through whose posterity,
according to the covenant, all nations of the earth were to be
blessed.[211]

Two genealogical records, purporting to give the lineage of Jesus are
found in the New Testament, one in the first chapter of Matthew, the
other in the third chapter of Luke. These records present several
apparent discrepancies, but such have been satisfactorily reconciled by
the research of specialists in Jewish genealogy. No detailed analysis of
the matter will be attempted here; but it should be borne in mind that
the consensus of judgment on the part of investigators is that Matthew's
account is that of the royal lineage, establishing the order of sequence
among the legal successors to the throne of David, while the account
given by Luke is a personal pedigree, demonstrating descent from David
without adherence to the line of legal succession to the throne through
primogeniture or nearness of kin.[212] Luke's record is regarded by
many, however, as the pedigree of Mary, while Matthew's is accepted as
that of Joseph. The all important fact to be remembered is that the
Child promised by Gabriel to Mary, the virginal bride of Joseph, would
be born in the royal line. A personal genealogy of Joseph was
essentially that of Mary also, for they were cousins. Joseph is named as
son of Jacob by Matthew, and as son of Heli by Luke; but Jacob and Heli
were brothers, and it appears that one of the two was the father of
Joseph and the other the father of Mary and therefore father-in-law to
Joseph. That Mary was of Davidic descent is plainly set forth in many
scriptures; for since Jesus was to be born of Mary, yet was not begotten
by Joseph, who was the reputed, and, according to the law of the Jews,
the legal, father, the blood of David's posterity was given to the body
of Jesus through Mary alone. Our Lord, though repeatedly addressed as
Son of David, never repudiated the title but accepted it as rightly
applied to Himself.[213] Apostolic testimony stands in positive
assertion of the royal heirship of Christ through earthly lineage, as
witness the affirmation of Paul, the scholarly Pharisee: "Concerning his
Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according
to the flesh;" and again: "Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of
David was raised from the dead."[214]

In all the persecutions waged by His implacable haters, in all the false
accusations brought against Him, in the specific charges of sacrilege
and blasphemy based on His acknowledgment of the Messiahship as His own,
no mention is found of even an insinuation that He could not be the
Christ through any ineligibility based on lineage. Genealogy was
assiduously cared for by the Jews before, during, and after the time of
Christ; indeed their national history was largely genealogical record;
and any possibility of denying the Christ because of unattested descent
would have been used to the fullest extent by insistent Pharisee,
learned scribe, haughty rabbi, and aristocratic Sadducee.

At the time of the Savior's birth, Israel was ruled by alien monarchs.
The rights of the royal Davidic family were unrecognized; and the ruler
of the Jews was an appointee of Rome. Had Judah been a free and
independent nation, ruled by her rightful sovereign, Joseph the
carpenter would have been her crowned king; and his lawful successor to
the throne would have been Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews.

Gabriel's annunciation to Mary was that of the Son of David, on whose
coming the hope of Israel rested as on a sure foundation. The One, thus
announced, was Emmanuel, even God who was to dwell in flesh with His
people,[215] the Redeemer of the world, Jesus the Christ.


NOTES TO CHAPTER 7.

1. John the Baptist Regarded as a Nazarite.--The instruction of the
angel Gabriel to Zacharias, that the promised son, John, was to "drink
neither wine nor strong drink," and the adult life of John as a dweller
in the desert, together with his habit of wearing rough garb, have led
commentators and Biblical specialists to assume that he was a "Nazarite
for life." It is to be remembered, however, that nowhere in scripture
extant is John the Baptist definitely called a Nazarite. A Nazarite, the
name signifying _consecrated_ or _separated_, was one, who by personal
vow or by that made for him by his parents, was set apart to some
special labor or course of life involving self denial. (See page 67).
Smith's _Comp. Dict, of the Bible_ says: "There is no notice in the
Pentateuch of Nazarites for life; but the regulations for the vow of a
Nazarite of days are given (Numb. 6:1-2). The Nazarite, during the term
of his consecration, was bound to abstain from wine, grapes, and every
production of the vine, and from every kind of intoxicating drink. He
was forbidden to cut the hair of his head, or to approach any dead body,
even that of his nearest relation." The sole instance of a Nazarite for
life named in the scriptures is that of Samson, whose mother was
required to put herself under Nazarite observances prior to his birth,
and the child was to be a Nazarite to God from his birth (Judges 13:3-7,
14). In the strictness of his life, John the Baptist is to be credited
with all the personal discipline required of Nazarites whether he was
under voluntary or parental vows or was not so bound.

2. Circumcision, while not exclusively a Hebrew or an Israelitish
practise, was made a definite requirement through the revelations of God
to Abraham, as the sign of the covenant between Jehovah and the
patriarch. (Gen. 17:9-14.) This covenant was made to include the
establishment of Abraham's posterity as a great nation, and provided
that through his descendants should all nations of the earth be blessed
(Gen. 22:18)--a promise which has been proved to mean that through that
lineage should the Messiah be born. Circumcision was a binding
condition; and its practise therefore became a national characteristic.
Every male was to be circumcized eight days after birth (Gen. 17:12;
Lev. 12:3). This requirement as to age came to be so rigidly enforced,
that even if the eighth day fell on a Sabbath the rite had to be
performed on that day (John 7:22, 23). All male slaves had to be
circumcized (Gen. 17:12, 13) and even strangers who sojourned with the
Hebrews and desired to partake of the Passover with them had to submit
to the requirement (Exo. 12:48). From the _Standard Bible Dictionary_ we
take the following: "The ceremony indicated the casting off of
uncleanness as a preparation for entrance into the privileges of
membership in Israel. In the New Testament, with its transfer of
emphasis from the external and formal to the inner and spiritual side of
things, it was first declared unnecessary for Gentile converts to the
gospel to be circumcized (Acts 15:28), and afterward the rite was set
aside even by Jewish Christians." It became customary to name a child at
the time it was circumcized, as is instanced in the case of John, son of
Zacharias (Luke 1:59).

3. Zacharias' Affliction.--The sign for which Zacharias asked was thus
given by the angel: "Behold, thou shalt be dumb, and not able to speak,
until the day that these things shall be performed, because thou
believest not my words, which shall be fulfilled in their season." (Luke
1:20.) From the account of the circumcision and naming of the boy, John,
it is held by some that the afflicted father was also deaf, as the
company "made signs" to him as to how he would have his son named (verse
62).

4. Jewish Betrothal.--The vow of espousal, or betrothal, has always been
regarded as sacred and binding in Jewish law. In a manner it was as
binding as a marriage ceremony, though it carried none of the particular
rights of marriage. The following succinct statements are taken from
Geikie's _Life and Words of Christ_, vol. I. p. 99: "Among the Jews of
Mary's day it was even more of an actual engagement [than it later came
to be]. The betrothal was formally made with rejoicings in the house of
the bride under a tent or slight canopy raised for the purpose. It was
called the 'making sacred' as the bride thenceforth was sacred to her
husband in the strictest sense. To make it legal, the bridegroom gave
his betrothed a piece of money, or the worth of it, before witnesses,
with the words, 'Lo, thou art betrothed unto me,' or by a formal writing
in which similar words and the maiden's name were given, and this in the
same way was handed to her before witnesses."

5. Genealogies of Joseph and Mary.--"It is now almost certain that the
genealogies in both Gospels are genealogies of Joseph, which if we may
rely on early traditions of their consanguinity involve genealogies of
Mary also. The Davidic descent of Mary is implied in Acts 2:30; 13:23;
Rom. 1:3; Luke 1:32, etc. St. Matthew gives the legal descent of Joseph
through the elder and regal line, as heir to the throne of David; St.
Luke gives the natural descent. Thus, the real father of Salathiel was
heir of the house of Nathan, but the childless Jeconiah (Jer. 22:30) was
the last lineal representative of the elder kingly line. The omission of
some obscure names and the symmetrical arrangement, into tesseradecads
were common Jewish customs. It is not too much to say that after the
labors of Mill (_On the Mythical Interpretation of the Gospels_, pp.
147-217) and Lord A. C. Hervey (_On the Genealogies of Our Lord_, 1853)
scarcely a single difficulty remains in reconciling the apparent
divergencies. And thus in this as in so many other instances, the very
discrepancies which appear to be most irreconcilable, and most fatal to
the historic accuracy of the four evangelists, turn out, on closer and
more patient investigation, to be fresh proofs that they are not only
entirely independent, but also entirely trustworthy."--Farrar, _Life of
Christ_, p. 27, note.

The writer of the article "Genealogy of Jesus Christ" in Smith's _Bible
Dict_, says: "The New Testament gives us the genealogy of but one
person, our Savior (Matt. 1; Luke 3).... The following propositions will
explain the true construction of these genealogies (so Lord A. C.
Hervey): 1. They are both the genealogies of Joseph, i.e. of Jesus
Christ, as the reputed and legal son of Joseph and Mary. 2. The
genealogy of Matthew is, as Grotius asserted, Joseph's genealogy as
legal successor to the throne of David. That of Luke is Joseph's private
genealogy, exhibiting his real birth, as David's son, and thus showing
why he was heir to Solomon's crown. The simple principle that one
evangelist exhibits that genealogy which contained the successive heirs
to David's and Solomon's throne, while the other exhibits the paternal
stem of him who was the heir, explains all the anomalies of the two
pedigrees, their agreements as well as their discrepancies, and the
circumstance of there being two at all. 3. Mary, the mother of Jesus,
was probably the daughter of Jacob, and first cousin to Joseph her
husband."

A valuable contribution to the literature of this subject appears in the
_Journal of the Transactions of the Victoria Institute, or Philosophical
Society of Great Britain_, 1912, vol. 44, pp. 9-36, as an article, "The
Genealogies of our Lord," by Mrs. A. S. Lewis, and discussion thereof by
many scholars of acknowledged ability. The author, Mrs. Lewis, is an
authority on Syriac manuscripts, and is one of the two women who, in
1892, discovered in the library of St. Catherine's monastery on Mount
Sinai, the Syriac palimpsest MS. of the four Gospels. The gifted author
holds that Matthew's account attests the royal pedigree of Joseph, and
that Luke's genealogical table proves the equally royal descent of Mary.
Mrs. Lewis says: "The Sinai Palimpsest also tells us that Joseph and
Mary went to Bethlehem, to be enrolled there, because they were both of
the house and lineage of David."

Canon Girdlestone, in discussing the article, says in pertinent emphasis
of Mary's status as a princess of royal blood through descent from
David: "When the angel was foretelling to Mary the birth of the Holy
Child, he said, 'The Lord God shall give Him the throne of His father
David.' Now if Joseph, her betrothed, had alone been descended from
David, Mary would have answered, 'I am not yet married to Joseph,'
whereas she did answer simply, 'I am an unmarried woman,' which plainly
implies--if I were married, since I am descended from David, I could
infuse my royal blood into a son, but how can I have a royal son while I
am a virgin?'"

After brief mention of the Jewish law relating to adoption, wherein it
is provided (according to Hammurabi's Code, section 188), that if a man
teach his adopted son a handicraft, the son is thereby confirmed in all
the rights of heirship, Canon Girdlestone adds: "If the crown of David
had been assigned to his successor in the days of Herod it would have
been placed on the head of Joseph. And who would have been the legal
successor to Joseph? Jesus of Nazareth would have been then the King of
the Jews, and the title on the cross spoke the truth. God had raised Him
up to the house of David."

6. The Inner Sanctuary of the Temple.--The Holy of Holies in the Temple
of Herod retained the form and dimensions of the Oracle in the Temple of
Solomon; it was therefore a cube, twenty cubits in each principal
measurement. Between this and the Holy Place hung a double veil, of
finest material, elaborately embroidered. The outer of the two veils was
open at the north end, the inner at the south; so that the high priest
who entered at the appointed time once a year could pass between the
veils without exposing the Holy of Holies. The sacred chamber was empty
save for a large stone upon which the high priest sprinkled the
sacrificial blood on the Day of Atonement; this stone occupied the place
of the Ark and its Mercy Seat. Outside the veil, in the Holy Place,
stood the altar of incense, the seven-branched candlestick, and the
table of shewbread.--_The House of the Lord_, p. 59.