LECTURE II. THE SOJOURN IN EGYPT, AND THE DELIVERY OF THE LAW. MATTH. II. 15. Out of Egypt have I called my Son. THE words here adduced by the Evangelist are plainly taken from the prophet Hosea, who twice in substance repeats them: "When Israel was a child I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt1;" and again: "By a prophet the Lord brought Israel out of Egypt, and by a prophet was he preserved." It is evident that Hosea was referring in part to the people of Israel. It is certain (for S. Matthew declares it) that the prediction had its full accomplishment in Christ. So closely was all that concerned the Israelites bound up with the hopes of the promised Saviour, that the nation was a type of Christ, and the terms Israel and Jacob were employed in the Old Testament (as is asserted by early Christians and confessed by Rabbinical writers3) to denote the person of the Messiah. It is in accordance with their typical character that 1 Hos. xi. 1. Hos. xii. 13. * See Just. M. Tryph. p. 353. A., and Whitby in Matth. ii, 15. the condition of this race, at different stages of their national existence, should have had prospective reference to Him of whom they were the type, and that the events of their history should have been preparatory to His coming. The brief mention of the origin of various nations in the tenth chapter of Genesis, informs us that the Israelites were first brought into contact with the descendants of Ham. The earliest empire established in the world was that founded by Nimrod the son of Cush, who made Babylon his seat of empire, and pushed his conquests into what was afterwards called Assyria1, and was a mighty one of the earth. At the time of Abraham this empire must have lost much of its early predominance. For there were kings of Shinar, of Ellasar, of Elam, and of nations, each independent of the other, and forming a separate confederacy for a particular expedition2. And the descendants of two other sons of Ham, Canaan and Mizraim3, were then numerous and independent. 1 Gen. x. 11. The marginal reading, He went out into Assyria, seems preferable to the translation in the Authorized Version. Asshur was a son of Shem, (Gen. x. 22). We observe that in the genealogies of the Chronicles (1 Chron. i.), there is no mention of Asshur but as a son of Shem. 2 Gen. xiv. 1. 3 I have adopted the language of Scripture in calling : The Canaanites were divided into several petty kingdoms, often at war among themselves the kingdoms of Sodom, of Gomorrah, of Admah, of Zeboiim, and of Bela. But these kingdoms, though independent, were not strong. Even when united, they could not stand their ground against an army which Abraham with three hundred and eighteen servants overcame1: nor does there appear to have been any settled occupation of the country; for Abraham and Lot, though coming as strangers with flocks and herds too numerous to allow them to remain together, entered without dispute into the most fertile pastures; and Jacob's return, with all that he Mizraim a son of Ham, but this denomination does not necessarily imply personality. This is proved by the mention in Gen. x. 13, of Ludim, Ananim, &c., and especially of Philistim, (in 1 Chron. i. 12, we read "the Philistines"). The termination plainly implies that nations are spoken of, and in the LXX. each name is preceded by the article TOús. The form of the word Mizraim suggests the idea that this also is the name of a people. Bochart says that the termination is dual, which has been supposed to indicate the two kingdoms of Upper and Lower Egypt. There is, however, some difficulty in the connexion of Mizraim with Canaan and with Cush, who were both individuals. But so in Gen. x. 15, 16, “Canaan begat Sidon his firstborn, and Heth, and the Jebusite," &c. It is evident that in this chapter both nations and individuals are spoken of. To which of the two a particular name is to be referred, is not always easy to be determined. 1 Gen. xiv. 14. had acquired in his sojourn with Laban, met with no impediment from the Canaanites. The most powerful and wealthy tribes had been collected into the cities of the Plain, and were swept away by that terrible visitation, which has left its permanent record in the waters of the Dead Sea: a devastation, which in all probability weakened still further the Canaanitish power, and contributed to the quiet which the Patriarchs enjoyed in a land not yet given them to possess. S. Paul tells us that their position as pilgrims and strangers was calculated to elevate their hopes above this sublunary sphere, that the distance at which they saw the promises enabled them to look beyond their partial completion, and that the desire of a better, that is, of a heavenly country, was infused into their minds, and by them transmitted to their descendants1. Before the Israelites took possession of the soil they were to be subjected to other influences, and to dwell among a people differing widely from the tribes of Canaan. The land of Egypt was in very ancient days the seat of the arts of civilization. There is so great variety in the number of years assigned by different chronologists to the 1 Heb. xi. 13—16. earlier dynasties of the Egyptian empire, that it is impossible to determine with any preciseness the era of its foundation. It seems, however, most agreeable to the records and to the monuments which we possess, to conclude that it must be carried back to a period not far removed from the general Deluge1. The notices which occur in Scripture accord with the information which we derive from other sources of Egyptian history. The two invasions of Palestine by Chedorlaomer, king of Elam2, and the grievous famines which sent Abraham into Egypt, furnish us with no improbable causes of the invasions from the East, which we ascertain upon independent authority to have taken place about this time1. And from Scripture we gather incidentally that when Abraham and his household were but a wandering family with no settled abode, removing their flocks and herds from one pasture to another in the plains of Canaan, Egypt had a "king," and "princes," and 1 This is the conclusion to which Poole in his Hora Ægyptiaca arrives from an examination of astronomical and hieroglyphical records. He concludes the era of Menes to be B. C. 2717, forty-one years after the Dispersion of mankind, according to Septuagint Chronology. To the first seventeen dynasties of Manetho some assign 700, some 4000 years. 2 Gen. xiv. 1 and 5. 4 See Hor. Ægypt. Part II. § 4. C. H. L. 3 Gen. xii. 10. D |