in these
Old Testament passages began to be fulfilled by the symbolical action
of the Magi, by which the image was represented externally; for the
gold, incense, and myrrh which they consecrated to the new-born King of
the Jews symbolized the homage which they offered to Him; and these
gifts are certainly expressly mentioned by Matthew for this reason,
that they occur in the Old Testament passages. As this event formed, in
one respect, the beginning of the fulfilment, so, in another, it formed
a new prophecy by deeds,--the type of a new, greater, and more proper
fulfilment. The Apostles considered these Magi as the types and
representatives of the whole mass of heathen nations who were, at a
subsequent period, to do homage to the Messiah. They were the
ambassadors, as it were, of the heathen world, to greet the new-born
King, just as the shepherds, whom God Himself had chosen, were the
deputies of the Jews. In my work on Balaam, pp. 480-482, I have proved
that, even with these references, the contents of the passage are not
yet exhausted,--that there still remains a prominent point, viz., the
star which the Magi saw, and that this refers to Balaam's prophecy of
the star proceeding from Jacob.

But if it be established that the view of the prophecy under
consideration, which the Evangelist reports as that of the Sanhedrim,
must, at the same time, be considered as his own, we must also suppose
that the quotation, even in its particulars, is approved by him, and
that the view which was first advanced by _Jerome_ ("I believe that he
wished to exhibit the negligence of the scribes and priests, and wrote
it down as it had been spoken by them"), and recently by _Paulus_,
cannot be made use of in order to justify the deviations,--if any
should indeed be found. In order to ascertain this, we must examine
more closely the quotation in its relation to the original text of
the passage, Matt. ii. 6: [Greek: Kai su Bethleem, ge Iouda oudamos
elachiste ei en tois hegemosin Iouda. ek sou gar exeleusetai
hegoumenos, hostis poimanei ton laon mou, ton Israel.] The first thing
which demands our attention is [Greek: ge Iouda] for the Ephratah of
the original. The reason of this deviation is to be sought for in the
circumstance, that the place appears as Bethlehem Judah in 1 Sam. xvii.
12, where it is mentioned with a reference to David. The deviation at
the beginning has, accordingly, the same purpose [Pg 510] as that at
the close. As reg