1. Forasmuch as many have taken in
hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most
surely believed among us,
[Forasmuch as many have taken in hand,
&c.] Whereas it was several years after the ascension of our Lord before
the four books of the holy gospel were committed to writing; the
apostles, the seventy disciples, and other ministers of the word, in the
mean time everywhere dispersing the glad tidings: no wonder if any pious
and greedy auditors had, for their own memory's sake and the good of
others, noted in their own private table-books as much as they were
capable of carrying from the sermons and discourses which they so
frequently heard. Nor is it more strange if some of these should from
their own collections compile and publish now and then some commentaries
or short histories of the passages they had met with. Which, however
they might perform out of very good intentions, and a faithful impartial
pen, yet were these writings far from commencing an infallible canon, or
eternal unalterable rule of the Christian faith.
It was not in the power of this kind of
writers either to select what the Divine Wisdom would have selected for
the holy canon, or to declare those things in that style wherein the
Holy Spirit would have them declared, to whom he was neither the guide
in the action nor the director of their pen.
Our evangelist, therefore, takes care to
weigh such kind of writings in such a balance as that it may appear they
are neither rejected by him as false or heretical, nor yet received as
divine and canonical: not the first, because he tells us they had
written even those very things which the heavenly preachers had
delivered to them; not the latter, for to those writings he opposeth,
that he himself was one that had perfect understanding of things from
above. Of which we shall consider in its proper place.
[To set forth in order a declaration.]
A kind of phrase not much unlike what was so familiar amongst the Jews,
an orderly narration: saving, that that was more peculiarly
applied by them to the commemoration of the Passover. And yet it is used
in a larger sense too, who was he who set forth in order a
declaration.
[Of those things which are most
surely believed among us, &c.] Let us recollect what the unbelieving
Jews think and say of the actions, miracles, and doctrine of Christ; and
then we shall find it more agreeable to render this clause, of those
things which are most surely believed among us, according to what
Erasmus, Beza, our own English translators, and others, have rendered
it, than with the vulgar, of the things which are fulfilled amongst
us. They had said, "This deceiver seduceth the people, those wonders
he did were by the power of magic; 'but we do most surely believe those
things which he did and taught.'"
2. Even as they delivered them unto
us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the
word;
[Which from the beginning were
eyewitnesses and ministers of the word, &c.] If from the
beginning have reference to the time wherein Christ published the
gospel upon earth, as no one need to doubt, then there is little
distinction to be made between eyewitnesses and ministers: for
who from that time had been made a minister of the word, that had
not been an eyewitness and seen Christ himself? so that we may
easily conjecture who are these eyewitnesses and ministers
here, viz., the apostles, the seventy disciples, and others that filled
up the number of the hundred and twenty, mentioned
Acts 1:15.
It is said of Mnason, that he was an
old disciple,
Acts 21:16. It may be supposed of him, that he had been a disciple
from the beginning; that is, from the very time wherein Christ
himself published his glad tidings. Those words a good while ago,
Acts 15:7, ought to be understood also in this sense.
3. It seemed good to me also, having
had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write
unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,
[Having had perfect understanding of
all things from the very first.] This is not indeed ill rendered,
having understood these things from the very first: but it may
perhaps be better, having attained to an understanding of these
things from above,--from heaven itself. So from above
signifies from heaven,
John 3:3,31, 19:11;
James 1:17, 3:17, &c. For,
I. This version includes the other: for
he that hath a perfect understanding of these things from above,
or by divine inspiration, did understand them from the beginning.
II. Take notice of the distinction that
is in Josephus, He that undertakes to give a true relation of things
to others, ought himself to know them first very accurately, having
either very diligently observed them himself, or learned by inquiry from
others. Now if St. Luke had writ his history as "he had learned from
others" (as they wrote whom he instances in verse 1), then he had been
amongst those that had learned from others. Nor could he promise
more than they might do, of whom he said, that many had taken in hand,
&c.
[Most excellent Theophilus.]
There is one guesses this most excellent Theophilus to have been
an Antiochian, another thinks he may be a Roman; but it is very
uncertain either who or whence he was. There was one Theophilus amongst
the Jews, at that very time, probably, when St. Luke wrote his Gospel;
but I do not think this was he. Josephus mentions him; "King Agrippa,
removing Jesus the son of Gamaliel from the high priesthood, gave it
to Mathias the son of Theophilus: in whose time the Jewish war began."
5. There was in the days of Herod,
the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of
Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name
was Elisabeth.
[Of the course of Abia.] They
are very little versed in the Holy Scriptures, and less in the Jewish
learning, that could imagine this Zacharias to have been the high
priest, when he is said to have been but of the eighth course, and to
have attained this turn of attendance by lot.
As to the institution of the courses
under the first Temple, there is no need to say anything, because every
one hath it before him,
1 Chronicles 24. But under the second Temple there was indeed some
difference, not as to the order of their courses, but as to their heads
and families. Of which thing the Talmudists treat largely, and indeed
not altogether from the purpose: let them comment in my stead:
"Four courses of priests went up
out of Babylon; Jedaiah, Harim, Pashur, and Immer,
Ezra 2:36, &c. The prophets, who were conversant amongst them at
that time, obliged them, that if Jehoiarib himself should come up from
the captivity, that he should not thrust out the course that preceded
him, but be, as it were, an appendix to it. The prophets come forth, and
cast in four-and-twenty lots into the urn; Jedaiah comes, and having
drawn five, himself was the sixth. Harim comes, and having drawn five,
himself was the sixth. Pashur comes, and having drawn five, himself was
the sixth. Immer comes, and having drawn five, himself was the sixth. It
was agreed amongst them that if Jehoiarib himself should return out of
captivity, he should not exclude the foregoing course, but be, as it
were, an appendix to it. The heads of the courses stand forth, and
divide themselves into the houses of their fathers," &c. We have the
same thing in Babyl. Erachin, fol. 12. 1.
If these things be true (and, indeed,
by comparing them with the place in Ezra before quoted, we may believe
they are not much amiss), then the course of Abiah, both here and
Nehemiah 12:17, must not so much be understood of the stock or race
of Abijah, as that that course retained the name of Abijah still. For
though there were four-and-twenty classes made up of the four only
named, yet did they retain both their ancient order and ancient names
too. If therefore Jehoiarib, i.e. his course, should come up out of
Babylon (which, however, did not happen), it was provided that he should
not disturb the fixed and stated order by intruding into the first
place; but retaining the name of Jehoiarib in the first class, which
consisted now of those of Jedaiah, his course, should be
distributed amongst those orders.
II. The Rabbins have a tradition: there
were twenty-four courses of priests in the land of Israel, and
twelve courses in Jericho. What! twelve in Jericho? This would
increase the number too much. No; but there were twelve of those in
Jericho; that when the time came about that any course should go
up to Jerusalem, half a course went up from the land of Israel,
and half a course from Jericho, that by them might come a supply
both of water and food to their brethren that were at Jerusalem.
Gloss:--"When the time came that any
course should go up to Jerusalem, it divided itself, that half of it
should go to Jericho, that they might supply their brethren with water
and food," &c.
III. As to the circulation of these
courses or turns, we may guess something of it from the Gloss
in Midras Coheleth. The Midras itself hath these words: "It is R.
Chaija's tradition: It is written, Seven weeks shall be complete,
i.e. between the Passover and Pentecost,
Leviticus 23:15. But when are they so? When Joshua and Shecaniah
do not interfere."
Where the Gloss, from another author,
hath it thus: "when the calends of the month Nisan fall in with the
sabbath, then doth the Passover fall in with the sabbath too: and then
let them begin to number from the going out of the sabbath, and the
weeks will be complete according to the days of the creation. He takes
an instance from Joshua and Shecaniah. For there were twenty-four
courses, which took their turns alternately every sabbath: amongst which
Joshua was the ninth, and Shecaniah the tenth. On the first week of the
month Nisan, Jehoiarib was the first course; on the second week Jedaiah;
on the paschal week, all the courses attended together. The six
weeks to that sabbath that immediately preceded the Pentecost, there
ministered six courses, Harim, Seorim, Malchijah, Mijamin, Hakkos, Abiah.
In the sabbath that precedes the Pentecost, Joshua enters, but does not
attend till after Pentecost. Behold, Joshua and Shecaniah are not
between the Passover and Pentecost: for if Joshua was between the
Passover and Pentecost, the weeks would not be complete according to the
days of the creation."
He adds a great deal more, but, I
confess, it is beyond my reach: such is that that immediately follows:
"They are not complete as the days of the creation; for we may number
from three to three, or from five to five, and so Joshua and
Shecaniah will enter [upon their course] before the Pentecost.
For behold, the sabbath before Nisan, let it be Jehoiarib's turn, and
let there be seven weeks to the Passover," &c.; which must either be
some fault in the printer, or a riddle to me that I cannot tell what to
make of.
However, by the whole series of the
discourse it appears, that the beginning of the double circulation of
the courses was with the twofold beginning of the year, Nisan and
Tisri: as also that all the courses performed their ministry
together in the feasts. Here, indeed, is mention only as to the
Passover; but we do not want for authorities to make it out, that as
they did so then, so also at the feast of Pentecost and Tabernacles. Let
Jehoiarib, therefore, begin the first course in the beginning of the
month Nisan; and (remembering, that all the courses together
performed their service at the Passover and Pentecost) the courses
will all have run out in half the year; for so (taking in those two
feasts) six-and-twenty weeks are spent off. Then let Jehoiarib begin
again with the month Tisri; and suppose all the courses jointly
ministering at the feast of Tabernacles, and they will have finished
their round (excepting one week over) by the month Nisan again: which
gap of that one week how it is filled up, as also the intercalar month
when it happened, would be too much for us to discuss in this place.
IV. The course of Bilgah is put
out of its just order, and thrown into the last place, if that be true,
which we meet with in Jerusalem Succah. They say, "All that went
into the Mountain of the Temple made their entry on the right hand, and
went out at the left: but Bilgah went towards the south, because of the
apostasy of his daughter Mary: for she went and married a certain
soldier of the kingdom of the Grecians. He came and struck the top of
the altar, saying, 'O wolf, wolf, thou that devourest all the
good things of Israel, and yet in a time of straits helpest them not.'
There are also that say, that the reason why this was thus ordered was,
because Bilgah's course was once neglected, when it came about to
them to have gone up to have performed their ministry. Bilgah,
therefore, was always amongst those that went out, as Isbab was amongst
those that came in; having cast that course out of their order."
V. "For every course there was a
stationary assembly of priests, Levites, and Israelites, at
Jerusalem. When the time came, wherein the course must go up,
the priests and the Levites went up to Jerusalem; but the Israelites
that were within that course, all met within their own cities,
and read the history of the creation,
Genesis 1; and the stationary men fasted four days in that week;
viz. from the second to the fifth."
Gloss: "There was a stationary
assembly for every course stated and placed in Jerusalem, who should
assist in the sacrifices of their brethren: and besides these that were
stated in Jerusalem, there was a stationary assembly in every
city. All Israel was divided into twenty-four stations, according
to the twenty-four courses. There was the station of
priests, Levites, and Israelites, at Jerusalem; the priests of the
course went up to Jerusalem to their service, the Levites to their
singing; and of all the stations, there were some appointed and
settled at Jerusalem that were to assist at the sacrifices of their
brethren. The rest assembled in their own cities, poured out prayers
that the sacrifices of their brethren might be accepted; fasting, and
bringing forth the book of the law on their fast-day," &c. So the Gloss
hath it.
The reason of this institution as to
stationary-men is given us in the Misna; For how could every man's
offering be made, if he himself were not present? Now, whereas the
daily sacrifice, and some other offerings, were made for all Israel, and
it was not possible that all Israel should be present, these
stationaries were instituted, who, in the stead of all Israel, should
put their hands upon the daily sacrifice, and should be present at the
other offerings that were offered for all Israel. And while these were
performing this at Jerusalem, there were other stationaries in every
course, who, by prayers and fasting in their own cities, helped
forward, as much as they could, the services of their brethren that were
at Jerusalem.
"The children of Israel lay on their
hands, but the Gentiles do not. The men of Israel lay on their hands,
but the women do not. R. Jose saith, Abba Eliezer said to me, We had
once a calf for a peace offering: and bringing it into the Court of the
Women, the women put their hands upon it: not that this belonged to the
women so to do, but that the women's spirits might be pleased." A
remarkable thing.
The priests, throughout all the
courses grew into a prodigious number, if that be true in
Jerusalem Taanith; "R. Zeora in the name of Rabh Houna said, That
the least of all the courses brought forth eighty-five thousand
branches of priests." A thing not to be credited.
[And he wife was of the daughters of
Aaron.] In the Talmudists, a priestess; viz. one born of the
lineage of priests. It was lawful for a priest to marry a Levites, or
indeed a daughter of Israel: but it was most commendable of all to marry
one of the priests' line. Hence that story in Taanith, "Fourscore
pair of brethren-priests took to wife fourscore pair of
sister-priestesses in Gophne, all in one night."
There was hardly any thing among the
Jews with greater care and caution looked after than the marrying of
their priests; viz. that the wives they took should not by any means
stain and defile their priestly blood: and that all things which were
fit for their eating should be hallowed. Hence that usual phrase for an
excellent woman, She deserves to marry with a priest.
Josephus speaks much of this care,
that the whole priestly generation might be preserved pure and unblended.
[Elisabeth.] The Seventy give
this name to Aaron's wife,
Exodus 7:23.
6. And they were both righteous
before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord
blameless.
[In all the commandments and
ordinances, &c.] So
Numbers 36:13, These are the commandments and judgments. It
would perhaps seem a little too fine and curious to restrain the
commandments to the decalogue, or ten commandments,
and the ordinances to the ceremonial and judicial laws,
though this does not wholly want foundation. It is certain the precepts
delivered after the decalogue, from
Exodus 21 to chapter 24, are called judgments, or
ordinances,
Exodus 21:1, 24:3.
The Vulgar can hardly give any good
account why he should render ordinances by justifications,
much less the followers of that translation why they should from thence
fetch an argument for justification upon observation of the
commands, when the commands and institutions of men are by
foreign authors called ordinances; nay, the corrupt customs
that had been wickedly taken up have the same word,
1 Samuel 2:13, the priest's 'custom' with the people was, &c.
2 Kings 17:8, and walked in the 'statutes' of the heathen
The word ordinance is frequently
rendered by those interpreters from ordain; which, to wave all
other instances, may abundantly appear from
Psalm 119. And the very things which the Jews speak of the Hebrew
word obtain also in the Greek.
"Perhaps Satan and the Gentiles will
question with Israel, what this or that command means, and what should
be the reason of it. The answer that ought to be made in this case is,
It is ordained, it is a law given by God, and it becomes not thee
to cavil."
"Ye shall observe my statutes, [Lev
18:4] that is, even those which Satan and the nations of the world
do cavil at. Such are those laws about eating swine's flesh;
heterogeneous clothing; the nearest kinsman's [leviri] putting
off the shoe; the cleansing of the leper, and the scapegoat. If,
perhaps, it should be said that these precepts are vain and needless,
the text saith, 'I am the Lord. I, the Lord, have ordained these things;
and it doth not become thee to dispute them.'" They are ordinances,
just and equal, deriving their equity from the authority of him that
ordained them.
8. And it came to pass, that while
he executed the priest's office before God in the order of his course,
[In the order of his course.]
"The heads of the courses stood forth, and divided themselves
into so many houses of fathers. In one course, perhaps, there
were five, six, seven, eight, or nine houses of fathers: of the
course wherein there were but five houses of fathers, there were
three of them ministered three days, and two four days; if six, then
five served five days, and one two days; if seven, then every one
attended their day; if eight, then six waited six days, and two one day;
if nine, then five waited five days, and four the other two."
Take the whole order of their daily
attendance from Gloss in Tamid, cap. 6: "The great altar [or the
altar of sacrifice] goes before the lesser [or that of incense]. The
lesser altar goes before the pieces of wood [laid on the hearth of the
great altar]; the laying on the wood goes before the sweeping the inner
altar [or that of the incense]; the sweeping of the inner altar goes
before the snuffing of the lamps; the snuffing of the lamps goes before
the sprinkling of the blood of the daily sacrifice; the sprinkling of
the blood of the daily sacrifice goes before the snuffing of the two
other lamps; the snuffing of the two other lamps goes before the
incense; the incense goes before the laying on the parts of the
sacrifice upon the altar; the laying on the parts goes before the
Mincha; the Mincha goes before the meal [or the two loaves]
of the chief priest; the two loaves of the chief priest go before the
drink offering; the drink offering before the additional sacrifices. So
Abba Saul." But a little after; "The wise men say, 'The blood of the
sacrifice is sprinkled; then the lamps snuffed; then the incense; then
the snuffing of the two other lamps: and this is the tradition according
to the wise men.'"
9. According to the custom of the
priest's office, his lot was to burn incense when he went into the
temple of the Lord.
[According to the custom of the
priest's office, his lot was, &c.] "The ruler of the Temple saith,
Come ye, and cast your lots [that it may be determined] who shall
kill the sacrifice, who sprinkle the blood, who sweep the inner altar;
who cleanse the candlestick, who carry the parts [of the sacrifice] to
the ascent of the altar; the head, the leg, the two shoulders, the tail
of the back bone, the other leg, the breast, the gullet, the two sides,
the entrails, the flour, the two loaves, and the wine. He hath it, to
whom it happens by lot."
"The room Gazith [in which the lots
were cast] was in the form of a large hall: the casting of the lots was
on the east side of it, some elder sitting on the west [Gloss: Some
elder of the Sanhedrim, that instructed them in the custom and manner of
casting the lot.] The priests stood about in circle; and the ruler
coming, snatched off a cap from the head of this or that person, and by
that they understood where the lot was to begin."
"They stood in a circle; and the ruler,
coming, snatches off a cap from the head of this or that man: from him
the lot begins to be reckoned, every one lifting up his finger at each
number. The ruler also saith, 'In whomsoever the number ends, he obtains
this or that office by lot: and he declares the number'; e.g., there is,
it may be, the number one hundred, or threescore, according to the
multitude of the priests standing round. He begins to reckon from the
person whose cap he snatched off, and numbers round till the whole
number is run out. Now, in whomsoever the number terminates, he obtains
that office about which the lot was concerned. And so it is in all the
lots."
I will not inquire at present whether
this casting of lots was every day, or whether for the whole week,
wherein such or such a course performed its attendance. It seems that at
this time the number, whatever it was, for the choice of one to burn
incense, ended in our Zacharias: whose work and business in this office,
let it not be thought tedious to the reader to take an account of in
these following passages:
[To burn incense.] "He whose
lot it was to burn incense took a vessel containing the quantity of
three cabs, in the midst of which there was a censer full and
heaped up with incense; over which there was a cover."
"He to whom the lot fell of the
vessel wherein the coals were to be taken up, takes it and goes up
to the top of the altar; and there, stirring the fire about, takes out
some of the hottest coals, and, going down, pours them into a golden
vessel."
"When they had come from hence to the
space between the altar and the porch of the Temple, one of them tinkles
a little bell; by which, if any of the priests be without doors, he
knows that his brethren the priests are about to worship: so that he
makes all speed, and enters in. The Levite knows his brethren the
Levites are beginning to sing, so he makes haste, and enters in too.
Then the chief head or ruler of the course for that time sets all the
unclean in the east gate of the court, that they may be sprinkled with
blood."
"When they were about to go up the
steps of the porch, those whose lot it was to sweep off the ashes from
the inner altar and the candlestick went up first; he that was to sweep
the altar went in first, takes the vessel, worships, and goes out."
"He who, by lot, had the vessel for
gathering up the coals, placeth them upon the inner altar, lays them all
about to the brim of the vessel, then worships and goes out."
"He who was to burn the incense takes
the censer from the midst of the vessel wherein it was, and gives it to
one standing by. If any incense had been scattered in the vessel, he
gives it him into his hand; scatters the incense upon the coals, and
goes out. He does not burn the incense till the ruler bids him do it."
10. And the whole multitude of the
people were praying without at the time of incense.
[The whole multitude of the people
were praying without.] When the priest went in unto the holy place
to burn incense, notice was given to all by the sound of a little bell,
that the time of prayer was now: as hath been already noted.
I. As many as were in the court where
the altar was retired from between the Temple and the altar, and
withdrew themselves lower: They drew off from the space that was
between the porch and the altar while the incense was burning.
R. Jose saith, "That in five
circumstances the space between the porch and the altar is equal to the
temple itself. For no one comes thither bareheaded, disturbed with wine,
or with hands and feet unwashed. And as they withdraw themselves from
the temple itself in the time of incense, so do they the same at that
time from the space that is between the porch and that altar."
II. In the other courts they were not
bound to retire or change their place; but in all they gave themselves
to prayer, and that in deep silence: "The fathers ordained prayers in
the time of the daily sacrifice": And of what kind soever the prayers
were, whether their phylacterical ones alone, or their phylacterical in
conjunction with others, or others without their phylacterical, still
they uttered them very silently: "He that repeats his prayers in that
silent manner that he does not hear himself, he does his duty. But R.
Jose would have it, that he repeats his prayers so that the sound of his
own voice may reach his own ears." To this deep silence in the time of
incense and prayers that passage seems to allude,
Revelation 8:1,3.
When the incense and prayers were
ended, the parts of the sacrifice were laid upon the altar, and then the
Levites began their psalmody, and their sounding the trumpet.
11. And there appeared unto him an
angel of the Lord standing on the right side of the altar of incense.
[There appeared unto him an angel of
the Lord.] It might be a reasonable doubt whether ever there had
appeared an angel in the Temple, even in the first, when elsewhere the
appearance of angels was so very familiar, much less in the second, when
every thing of that nature had so perfectly ceased, till now that the
gospel began to dawn and shine out.
What we find related concerning Simeon
the just, how "for those forty years wherein he had served as high
priest, he had seen an angel clothed in white coming into the Holy Place
on the day of Expiation, and going out again: only his last year he saw
him come in, but did not see him go out again; which gave him to
understand that he was to die that year": we may suppose this invented
rather for the honour of the man than that any such thing happened for
the greater solemnity of the day.
[Standing on the right side of the
altar of incense.] "It is a tradition. The table [of the
shewbread] was on the north side, distant from the wall two cubits
and a half. The candlestick on the south, distant from the wall two
cubits and a half. The altar [of incense] placed in the middle
and drawn out a little towards the east."
So that the angel standing on the right
side of the altar stood on the north side: on which side if there were
an entrance into the Holy of Holies, as R. Chaninah thinks, then we may
suppose the angel, by a sudden appearance, came out from the Holy of
Holies.
15. For he shall be
great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong
drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his
mother's womb.
[Neither wine nor strong drink.]
That is, if the Jews may be our interpreters properly enough, "neither
new nor old wine";
Numbers 6:3. Greek, he shall separate himself from wine and
strong drink. Targum, He shall separate himself from wine new and
old. So
Deuteronomy 14:26.
"R. Jose of Galilee saith, Why doth the
Scripture double it, wine and strong drink? For is not wine
strong drink, and strong drink wine?" Strong drink is wine
no doubt,
Numbers 28:7; Thou shalt cause the strong wine to be poured out
before the Lord. Targum, a drink offering of old wine.
Whilst I a little more narrowly
consider that severe interdiction by which the Nazarite was forbidden
the total use of the vine, not only that he should not drink of the
wine, but not so much as taste of the grape, not the pulp nor stone of
the grape, no, not the bark of the vine; I cannot but call to mind,
I. Whether the vine might not be the
tree in paradise that had been forbidden to Adam, by the tasting of
which he sinned. The Jewish doctors positively affirm this without any
scruple.
II. Whether that law about the
Nazarites had not some reference to Adam while he was under that
prohibition in the state of innocency. For if the bodily and legal
uncleannesses, about which there are such strict precepts,
Numbers 5, especially the leprosy, the greatest of all uncleannesses,
did excellently decipher the state and nature of sin; might not the laws
about Nazarites which concerned the greatest purities in a most pure
religion, be something in commemoration of the state of man before his
fall?
There was, as the doctors call it,
the wine of command; which they were bound by precept to drink. Such
was "that wine of the tithes,"
Deuteronomy 12:17,18, that twas commanded to be drunk at Jerusalem,
and the cup of wine to be drunk at the Passover. What must the Nazarite
do in this case? If he drink, he violates the command of his order; if
he do not drink, he breaks the command about tithes and the laws of his
fathers. Let Elias untie this knot when he comes.
17. And he shall go before him in
the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the
children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a
people prepared for the Lord.
[In the Spirit and power of Elias.]
I. The Baptist is Elias, as our Saviour was David; that is, the
antitype,
Jeremiah 30:9;
Malachi 4:5;
Hosea 3:5, &c. It is less wonder that the Jews, from the words of
Malachi, should expect the personal coming of Elijah, since there are
not a few Christians that would be looking for the same thing, although
they have an angel in this place interpreting it otherwise, and our
blessed Saviour elsewhere himself [Matt
11:14]; "This is Elias which was for to come." But they
misunderstood the phrase of the "great and dreadful day of the Lord"; as
also were deceived into the mistake by the Greek version, "that Elias
must come before the last judgment."
II. It is not said by the prophet
Malachi, "Behold I will send you Elijah the Tishbite," but
"Elijah the prophet"; which perhaps might be better rendered,
"Behold I send you a prophet Elijah." And I may confidently say it would
not be so wide from the sense and meaning of Malachi as the Greek
interpreters, who by a prodigious daringness in favour of the Jewish
traditions, have rendered it, I send you Elijah the Tishbite.
III. If I mistake not, "Elias the
prophet" is but twice mentioned (I mean in those very terms) throughout
the whole book of God: once in this place in Malachi, the other in
2 Chronicles 21:12. And in both those places I believe it is not
meant Elijah the Tishbite in his own person, but some one in the spirit
and power of him. That the words in Malachi should be so understood,
both the angel and our Saviour teach us, and it seems very proper to be
so taken in that place in the Chronicles.
IV. That great prophet that lived in
Ahab's days is called the Tishbite, throughout the whole story of
him, and not the prophet. Nor is he called the prophet,
Luke 4:25 (where yet it is said, 'Eliseus the prophet'); nor by St.
James 5:17. For the very word Tishbi, which is his epithet,
sufficiently asserts his prophetic dignity when it denotes no other than
a converter. For whence can we better derive the etymology? to
which indeed the prophet Malachi seems to have alluded, "Behold, I send
you Elijah the prophet, and he shall turn," &c.
V. But be it so that he might be called
Tishbite from the city Toshab, as the Targum and other
Rabbins would have it (which yet is very farfetched), that very thing
might evince that it is not he himself that is meant by Malachi, but
some other, because he doth not mention the Tishbite, but a
prophet Elias, that is, a prophet in the spirit of Elias.
So among the Talmudists, any one
skilled in signs and languages is called Mordecai, viz. because he is
like him who lived in the days of Ahasuerus.
[To turn the hearts of the fathers
to the children.] John came in the power of Elias; not that
power by which he wrought miracles [for John wrought none,
John 10:41]; but "in the power of Elias turning the hearts of men,"
&c. Elias turned many of the children of Israel towards the Lord their
God,
1 Kings 18: so did John, who over and above "turned the hearts of
the fathers towards their children." Which what it should mean is
something dark and unintelligible. You will hardly allow the Jews' gloss
upon this place, who do so greatly mistake about the person, and who
will allow nothing of good to be done by the Elias they expect, but
within the compass of Israel. But are not the Gentiles to be converted?
They in the prophets' dialect are 'the children of Zion, of Jerusalem,
of the Jewish church': nothing more frequent. And in this sense are the
words of Malachi we are now handling to be understood: 'Elias the
Baptist will turn the hearts of the Jews towards the Gentiles, and of
the Gentiles towards the Jews.' This was indeed the great work of the
gospel, to bring over the Jew and Gentile into mutual embraces through
the acknowledgment of Christ: which John most happily began, who came
that "all men through him might believe,"
John 1:7: yea, and the Roman soldiers did believe as well as the
Jews,
Luke 3:14.
[The disobedient to the wisdom of
the just.] The Greek in Malachi hath it, the heart of a man
towards his neighbour. The words of the prophet having been varied,
the angel varies too, but to a more proper sense. For the Gentiles were
not to be turned to the Jews as such, or to the religion of the Jews,
but to God "in the wisdom of the just." "The children to the fathers":
the phrase fathers, according to the Jewish state at that time,
was of doubtful sound, and had something of danger in it; for by that
word generally at that time, was meant nothing else but the Fathers of
Traditions, to whom God forbid any should be turned to those fathers in
the folly of traditions, but to God in the wisdom of the just.
18. And Zacharias said unto the
angel, Whereby shall I know this? for I am an old man, and my wife well
stricken in years.
[For I am an old man.] If so
old a man, why then was he not sequestered from the service of the
Temple by the law of superannuation?
Numbers 4:3, 8:24,25. Hear what the Rabbins say in this case:
"There is something that is lawful in
the priests, that is unlawful in the Levites: and there is something
lawful in the Levites, that is unlawful in the priests. The Rabbins
deliver; the priests upon any blemish are unfit; as for their years they
are not unfit; the Levites for their years may be unfit, but by reason
of blemish are not. From that which is said, that at the age of fifty
years they shall cease waiting, we learn that years may make the Levites
unfit. Perhaps the priests also are made unfit through years: and
indeed, does it not seem in equity, that if the Levites, whom a blemish
doth not make unfit, should yet be made unfit by superannuation, should
not much more the priests be made unfit by superannuation, when even a
spot or blemish will make them unfit? But the text saith, This is the
law of the Levites; not, This is the law of the priests. The Rabbins
deliver: What time a priest comes to maturity, till he grow old, he is
fit to minister; and yet a spot or blemish makes him unfit. The Levite
from his thirtieth to his fiftieth year is fit for service; but being
superannuated, he becomes unfit. How must this be understood concerning
the Levites? To wit, for that time wherein the ark was in the
wilderness: but at Shiloh and in the Temple they were not rendered
unfit, unless through the defect of their voice."
21. And the people waited for
Zacharias, and marvelled that he tarried so long in the temple.
[They marvelled that he tarried so
long.] There is something of this kind told of Simeon the Just,
concerning whom we have made some mention already:
"The high priest made a short prayer in
the holy place. He would not be long in prayer, lest he should occasion
any fear in the people. There is a story of one who tarried a long while
in it, and the people were ready to have entered in upon him. They say
it was Simeon the Just. They say unto him, 'Why didst thou tarry so
long?' He answered them, saying, 'I have been praying for the Temple of
your God, that it be not destroyed.' They answered him again, 'However,
it was not well for you to tarry so long.'"
22. And when he came out, he could
not speak unto them: and they perceived that he had seen a vision in the
temple: for he beckoned unto them, and remained speechless.
[He beckoned unto them.] There
is also, verse 62, they made signs. The deaf and dumb man, he nods to
them, and they nod to him.
The Talmudists distinguish the
judgments given by a dumb man into the nodding of the head, and
the dumb man's making signs.
"If any person be dumb, and yet hath
his understanding, should they say to him, May we write a bill of
divorce to thy wife, and he nod with his head, they make the
experiment upon him three times," &c. And a little after they do not
much rely upon the signs of the deaf and dumb man. For as it is in
the same place, the dumb person, and the deaf and dumb, differ.
Gloss: "The one can hear and not speak; the other can neither hear nor
speak."
Amongst the doctors, the deaf and
dumb person is commonly looked upon as one made so by some fit of
palsy or apoplexy, by which the intellectuals are generally affected:
whence the deaf and dumb are, according to the traditional canons,
deprived of several offices and privileges of which others are capable.
This case therefore of Zacharias might
have occasioned a considerable question, whether he ought not to have
been sequestered from his ministry, and deprived of all the privileges
of his priesthood, because he had been struck deaf and dumb, but that it
happened to him in so signal and extraordinary a way.
24. And after those days his wife
Elisabeth conceived, and hid herself five months; saying,
[She hid herself five months.] "She
hid herself five months, saying, Thus hath the Lord dealt with me,
in the days wherein he looked on me, to take away my reproach among
men."
She was big with child, it is plain,
because God had looked on her, and taken away her reproach among men.
She hid herself, because the Lord had dealt so with her, till he had
taken away her reproach; giving her so remarkable a son, one who was to
be so strict a Nazarite, and so famous a prophet. Lest therefore she
should any way defile herself by going up and down, and thereby contract
any uncleanness upon the Nazarite in her womb, she withdraws, and
sequesters herself from all common conversation. Consult
Judges 13:4.
There were several amongst the Jews
that were wont to take upon them the sect of the Nazarites by their own
voluntary vow. [Three hundred at once in the days of Jannaeus the king
came together to Simeon Ben Shetah.] But there were but two only set
apart by divine appointment, Samson and the Baptist: whom the same
divine appointment, designing to preserve untouched from all kind of
pollution even in their mothers' wombs, directed that the mothers
themselves should keep themselves as distant as might be from all manner
of defilement whatsoever. Elizabeth obeys; and for the whole time
wherein she bore the child within her, she hid herself, for her
more effectually avoiding all kind of uncleannesses; although it is true
we have the mention but of five months, by reason of the story of
the sixth month, which was to be immediately related, verse 26.
26. And in the sixth month the angel
Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth,
[The angel Gabriel.] "R. Simeon
Ben Lachish saith, The names of angels went up by the hand of Israel out
of Babylon. For before it is said, Then flew one of the seraphim unto
me; the seraphim stood before him,
Isaiah 6; but afterward the man Gabriel, [Dan
9:21] and Michael your prince," [Dan
10:21].
The angel calls Zacharias back to
Daniel 9, where the prediction concerning the coming of Messiah was
foretold by Gabriel.
29. And when she saw him, she
was troubled at his saying, and cast in her mind what manner of
salutation this should be.
[Was troubled, &c.] I. It was
very rare and unusual for men to salute any women; at least if that be
true in Kiddushin. Rabh Judah, the president of the academy of
Pombeditha, went to Rabh Nachman, rector of the academy of Neharde, and
after some talk amongst themselves, "Saith Rabh Nachman, Let my daughter
Doneg bring some drink, that we may drink together. Saith the other,
Samuel saith, We must not use the ministry of a woman. But this is a
little girl, saith Nachman. The other answers, But Samuel saith, We
ought not to use the ministry of any woman at all. Wilt thou please,
saith Nachman, to salute Lelith my wife? But, saith he, Samuel saith,
The voice of a woman is filthy nakedness. But, saith Nachman, thou
mayest salute her by a messenger. To whom the other; Samuel saith, They
do not salute any woman. Thou mayest salute her, saith Nachman, by a
proxy her husband. But Samuel saith, saith he again, They do not salute
a woman at all."
II. It was still much more rare and
unusual to give such a kind of salutation as this, Hail, thou that
art highly favoured, by which title Gabriel had saluted Daniel of
old: with this exception, that it was terror enough so much as to see an
angel.
32. 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:
[Shall be called the Son of the
Highest.] That is, "he shall be called the Messiah": for Messiah
and the Son of God are convertible terms...
35. 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.
[The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee,
&c.] I. This verse is the angel's gloss upon that famous prophecy,
"Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bring forth." The veracity of which
Mary not questioning, believing further that she herself was that virgin
designed, and yet being utterly ignorant of the manner how so great a
thing should be brought about, she only asks, "How shall this be?" &c.
Doubtless she took the prophecy in its proper sense, as speaking of a
virgin untouched. She knew nothing then, nor probably any part of the
nation at that time so much as once thought of that sense by which the
Jews have now for a great while disguised that place...
II. Give me leave, for their sakes in
whose hand the book is not, to transcribe some few things out of that
noble author Morney, which he quotes concerning this grand mystery from
the Jews themselves:
"Truth shall spring out of the earth."
"R. Joden," saith he, "notes upon this place, that it is not said, Truth
shall be born, but shall spring out; because the
generation and nativity of the Messiah is not to be as other creatures
in the world, but shall be begot without carnal copulation; and
therefore no one hath mentioned his father, as who must be hid from the
knowledge of men till himself shall come and reveal him." And upon
Genesis: "Ye have said (saith the Lord), We are orphans, bereaved of our
father; such a one shall your Redeemer be, whom I shall give you." So
upon Zechariah, "Behold my servant, whose name is Branch": and out of
Psalm 110, "Thou art a priest after the order of Melchizedek": he
saith, R. Berachiah delivers the same things. And R. Simeon Ben Jochai
upon Genesis more plainly; viz. "That the Spirit, by the impulse of a
mighty power, shall come forth of the womb, though shut up, that will
become a mighty Prince, the King Messiah."--So he.
36. And, behold, thy cousin
Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the
sixth month with her, who was called barren.
[Hath also conceived a son in her
old age.] The angel teaches to what purpose it was that women,
either barren before or considerably stricken in years, should be
enabled to conceive and bring forth; viz. to make way for the easier
belief of the conception of a virgin. If they, either beside or beyond
nature, conceive a child, this may be some ground of belief that a
virgin, contrary to nature, may do so too. So Abraham by faith saw
Christ's day, as born of a pure virgin, in the birth of his own son
Isaac of his old and barren wife Sarah.
39. And Mary arose in those days,
and went into the hill country with haste, into a city of Juda:
[She went into the hill country,
&c.] That is, to Hebron,
Joshua 21:11. For though it is true indeed that the priests after
the return from Babylon were not all disposed and placed in all those
very same dwellings they had possessed before the captivity, yet it is
probable that Zacharias, who was of the seed of Aaron, being here said
to dwell in the hill country of Judah, might have his house in
Hebron, which is more peculiarly said to be 'the city of Aaron's
offspring.'
41. And it came to pass, that, when
Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and
Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost:
[The babe leaped in her womb.]
So the Seventy,
Genesis 25:22, the children leaped in her womb.
Psalm 114:4, the mountains skipped. That which is added by
Elizabeth, verse 44, the babe leaped in the womb for joy,
signifies the manner of the thing, not the cause: q.d. it leaped with
vehement exultation. For John, while he was an embryo in the womb,
knew no more what was then done, than Jacob and Esau when they were in
Rebekah's womb knew what was determined concerning them.
"At the Red Sea, even the infants sang
in the wombs of their mothers"; as it is said, from the fountain of
Israel
Psalm 88:27; where the Targum, to the same sense, "Exalt the Lord
ye infants in the bowels of your mothers, of the seed of Israel."
Let them enjoy their hyperboles.
Questionless, Elizabeth had learned
from her husband that the child she went with was designed as the
forerunner of the Messiah, but she did not yet know of what sort of
woman the Messiah must be born till this leaping of the infant in her
womb became some token to her.
56. And Mary abode with her about
three months, and returned to her own house.
[Abode with her three months.] A
space of time very well known amongst the doctors, defined by them to
know whether a woman be with child or no: which I have already observed
upon
Matthew 1.
59. And it came to pass, that on the
eighth day they came to circumcise the child; and they called him
Zacharias, after the name of his father.
[And they called it, &c.] I.
"The circumciser said, 'Blessed be the Lord our God, who hath sanctified
us by his precepts, and hath given us the law of circumcision.'" The
father of the infant said, "Who hath sanctified us by his precepts, and
hath commanded us to enter the child into the covenant of Abraham our
father." But where was Zacharias' tongue for this service?
II. God at the same time instituted
circumcision, and changed the names of Abram and Sarah: hence the custom
of giving names to their children at the time of their circumcision.
III. Amongst the several accounts why
this or that name was given to the sons, this was one that chiefly
obtained, viz. for the honour of some person whom they esteemed they
gave the child his name: which seems to have guided them in this case
here, when Zacharias himself, being dumb, could not make his mind known
to them. Mahli the son of Mushi hath the name of Mahli given him, who
was his uncle, the brother of Mushi his father,
1 Chronicles 23:21,23.
"R. Nathan said, 'I once went to the
islands of the sea, and there came to me a woman, whose first-born had
died by circumcision; so also her second son. She brought the third to
me. I bade her wait a little, till the blood might assuage. She waited a
little, and then circumcised him, and he lived: they called him,
therefore, by my name, Nathan of Babylon.'" See also Jerusalem
Jevamoth.
"There was a certain family at
Jerusalem that were wont to die about the eighteenth year of their age:
they made the matter known to R. Jochanan, Ben Zacchai, who said,
'Perhaps you are of Eli's lineage, concerning whom it is said, The
increase of thine house shall die in the flower of their age. Go ye and
be diligent in the study of the law, and ye shall live.' They went and
gave diligent heed to the law, and lived. They called themselves,
therefore, the family of Jochanan, after his name."
It is disputed in the same tract,
whether the son begot by a brother's raising up seed to his brother
should not be called after the name of him that is deceased: for
instance, if one dies without a son, and his name be Joseph, or Jochanan,
whether the son that is born to this man's brother, taking his brother's
widow to wife, should not have the name after him that afirst had her,
and be called 'Joseph,' or 'Jochanan.' Otherwise, indeed, it was very
seldom that the son bore the name of the father, as is evident both in
the Holy Scriptures and the Rabbinical writers. It cannot be denied but
that sometimes this was done; but so very rarely, that we may easily
believe the reason why the friends of Zacharias would have given the
child his own name was merely, either because they could by no means
learn what he himself designed to call him, or else in honour to him,
however he lay under that divine stroke at present, as to be both deaf
and dumb.
78. Through the tender mercy of our
God; whereby the dayspring from on high hath visited us.
[The dayspring from on high.] I
would readily have rendered it the branch from on high, but for
what follows, "to give light," &c...
80. And the child grew, and waxed
strong in spirit, and was in the deserts till the day of his showing
unto Israel.
[In the deserts.] Whether John
was an eremite in the sense as it is now commonly taken, we may inquire
and judge by these two things: I. Whether there was ever any eremite in
this sense among the Jews. II. Whether he absented himself from the
synagogues; and whether he did not present himself at Jerusalem in the
feasts: and to this may be added, whether he retired and withdrew
himself from the society of mankind. If he absented from the synagogues,
he must have been accounted a wicked neighbour. If from the
feasts, he transgressed the command,
Exodus 23:17. If from the society of mankind, what agreeableness was
there in this? It seems very incongruous, that he that was born for this
end, "to turn the disobedient," &c. should withdraw himself from all
society and converse with them. Nothing would persuade me sooner that
John was indeed an anchoret, than that which he himself saith, that he
did not know Jesus,
John 1:31, whereas he was so very near akin to him. One might think,
surely he must have lain hid in some den or cave of the earth, when, for
the space of almost thirty years wherein he had lived, he had had no
society with Jesus, so near a kinsman of his, nay, not so much as in the
least to know him. But if this were so, how came he to know and so
humbly refuse him, when he offered himself to be baptized by him?
Matthew 3:14; and this before he was instructed who he was, by the
descent of the Holy Ghost upon him?
John 1:33.
[eremite - hermit; esp.: a religious
recluse.--Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary.]
From this question may arise two
more:--
I. Whether John appeared or acted
under the notion of a prophet before his entrance into the thirtieth
year of his age. I am apt to think he did not: and hence I suppose it is
said concerning him, "that he was in the deserts"; that is, he was
amongst the rustics, and common rank of men, as a man of no note or
quality himself, till he made himself public under the notion and
authority of a prophet.
II. Whether he might not well know his
kinsman Jesus in all this time, and admire his incomparable sanctity,
and yet be ignorant that he was the Messiah. Yea, and when he modestly
repulsed him from his baptism, was it that he acknowledged him for the
Messiah? (which agrees not with
John 1:33) or not rather that, by reason of his admirable holiness,
he saw that he was above him?
[Till the day of his shewing unto
Israel.] John was unquestionably a priest by birth; and being
arrived at the thirtieth year of his age, according to the custom of
that nation, he was, after examination of the great council, to have
been admitted into the priestly office, but that God had commissioned
him another way.
"In the room Gazith the great council
of Israel sat, and judged concerning the priesthood. The priest in whom
any blemish was found, being clothed and veiled in black, went out and
was dismissed: but if he had no blemish, he was clothed and veiled in
white, and going in ministered, and gave his attendance with the rest of
the priests his brethren. And they made a gaudy day, when there
was no blemish found in the seed of Aaron the priest."
Table of Contents
