1. And it came to pass, that
on one of those days, as he taught the people in the temple, and
preached the gospel, the chief priests and the scribes came upon him
with the elders.
[The chief priests and the scribes
with the elders.] So it is in
Mark 11:27: but in
Matthew 21:23, it is the chief priests and elders of the people.
Now the question is, who these elders should be, as they are
distinguished from the chief priests and the scribes. The
Sanhedrim consisted chiefly of priests, Levites, and Israelites,
although the original precept was for the priests and Levites only. "The
command is, that the priests and Levites should be of the great council;
as it is said, Thou shalt go unto the priests and Levites: but if
such be not to be found, although they were all Israelites, behold, it
is allowed."
None will imagine that there ever was a
Sanhedrim wherein there were Israelites only, and no priests or Levites;
nor, on the other hand, that there ever was a Sanhedrim wherein there
were only priests and Levites, and no Israelites. The scribes,
therefore, seem in this place to denote either the Levites, or
else, together with the Levites, those inferior ranks of priests who
were not the chief priests: and then the elders, may be
the Israelites, or those elders of the laity that were not of the
Levitical tribe. Such a one was Gamaliel the present president of the
Sanhedrim, and Simeon his son, of the tribe of Judah.
37. Now that the dead are raised,
even Moses showed at the bush, when he calleth the Lord the God of
Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.
[He calleth the Lord the God of
Abraham, &c.] "Why doth Moses say (Exo
32:13), Remember Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob? R. Abin saith, The Lord
said unto Moses, 'I look for ten men from thee, as I looked for that
number in Sodom: find me out ten righteous persons among the people, and
I will not destroy thy people.' Then said Moses, 'Behold, here am I, and
Aaron, and Eleazar, and Ithamar, and Phineas, and Caleb, and Joshua.'
'But' saith God, 'these are but seven; where are the other three?' When
Moses knew not what to do, he saith, 'O eternal God, do those live
that are dead?' 'Yes,' saith God. Then saith Moses, 'If those that
are dead do live, remember Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.'"
42. And David himself saith in the
book of Psalms, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,
[The Lord said unto my Lord, &c.]
Whereas St. Matthew tells us, That "no man was able to answer him a
word" to that argument, whereby he asserted the divinity of the Messias,
it is plain that those evasions were not yet thought of, by which the
Jews have since endeavoured to shift off this place. For the Talmudists
apply the psalm to Abraham; the Targumist (as it seems) to David; others
(as Justin Martyr tells us) to Hezekiah; which yet I do not remember I
have observed in the Jewish authors. His words are in his Dialogue with
Tryphon: I am not ignorant, that you venture to explain this psalm
(when he had recited the whole psalm) as if it were to be understood
of king Hezekiah.
The Jewish authors have it thus: "Sem
the Great said unto Eliezer [Abraham's servant], 'When the kings of the
east and of the west came against you, what did you?' He answered and
said, 'The Holy Blessed God took Abraham, and made him to sit on his
right hand.'" And again: "The Holy Blessed God had purposed to have
derived the priesthood from Shem; according as it is said, Thou art the
priest of the most high God: but because he blessed Abraham before he
blessed God, God derived the priesthood from Abraham. For so it is said,
And he blessed him and said, Blessed be Abraham of the most high God,
possessor of heaven and earth, and blessed be the most high God. Abraham
saith unto him, Who useth to bless the servant before his Lord? Upon
this God gave the priesthood to Abraham, according as it is said, The
Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand. And afterward it is
written, The Lord sware and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever
for the speaking of Melchizedek." Midras Tillin and others
also, in the explication of this psalm, refer it to Abraham. Worshipful
commentators indeed!
46. Beware of the scribes, which
desire to walk in long robes, and love greetings in the markets, and the
highest seats in the synagogues, and the chief rooms at feasts;
[Which desire to walk in long robes.]
In garments to the feet; in long robes: which their own Rabbins
sufficiently testify. "R. Jochanan asked R. Banaah, What kind of
garment is the inner garment of the disciple of the wise men? It is
such a one, that the flesh may not be seen underneath him." The Gloss
is, It is to reach to the very sole of the foot, that it may not be
discerned when he goes barefoot. "What is the 'talith,' that the
disciple of the wise wears? That the inner garment may not be seen
below it to a handbreadth."
What is that,
Luke 15:22, the first robe? [the best robe, AV]. Is it
the former robe, that is, that which the prodigal had worn
formerly? or the first, i.e. the chief and best robe? It
may be queried, whether it may not be particularly understood the
talith as what was in more esteem than the chaluk, and that
which is the first garment in view to the beholders. "I saw
amongst the spoils a Babylonish garment,
Joshua 7. Rabh saith, A long garment called melotes." The
Gloss is, "a 'talith' of purest wool."
24. And they shall fall by the edge
of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and
Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the
Gentiles be fulfilled.
[Until the times of the Gentiles be
fulfilled.] "Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles,
until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled": and what then? in
what sense is this word until to be understood? Let every one
have his conjecture, and let me be allowed mine. I am well assured our
Saviour is discoursing about the fall and overthrow of Jerusalem; but I
doubt, whether he touches upon the restoration of it: nor can I see any
great reason to affirm, that the times of the Gentiles will be fulfilled
before the end of the world itself. But as to this controversy, I shall
not at present meddle with it. And yet, in the mean time, I cannot but
wonder that the disciples, having so plainly heard these things from the
mouth of their master, what concerned the destruction both of the place
and nation, should be so quickly asking, "Lord, wilt thou at this time
restore the kingdom to Israel?" Nor do I less wonder to find the learned
Beza expounding the very following verse after this manner: "Then shall
there be the signs in the sun, &c.; that is, after those times are
fulfilled, which were allotted for the salvation of the Gentiles, and
vengeance upon the Jews, concerning which St. Paul discourses
copiously."
Romans 11:25, &c: when, indeed, nothing could be said clearer for
the confutation of that exposition, than that of verse 32; "Verily, I
say unto you, This generation shall not pass away till all be
fulfilled." It is strange this should be no more observed, as it ought
to have been, by himself and divers others, when, in truth, these very
words are as a gnomon to the whole chapter. All the other passages of
the chapter fall in with
Matthew 24 and
Mark 13, where we have placed those notes that were proper; and
shall repeat nothing here. Which method I have taken in several places
in this evangelist, where he relates passages that have been related
before, and which I have had occasion to handle as I met with them.
4. And he went his way, and communed
with the chief priests and captains, how he might betray him unto them.
[And captains.] They are called,
verse 52, captains of the Temple: and in the singular number,
the captain of the Temple,
Acts 4:1: but who should this or these be?
I. All know that there was a Roman
garrison in the castle of Antonia, whose charge especially was to
suppress all tumults and seditions in the Temple: but was the tribune,
or the centurions of that garrison called by the name of the captains
of the Temple? Surely rather the captains of the castle of
Antonia. And indeed it appears not that the Roman captains had
conspired against the life of Christ, that Judas should betake himself
to them to make a bargain for the betraying of him.
II. The conjecture might be more
probable of those rulers in the Temple, concerning whom we have this
mention: "These are the rulers that were in the Temple: Jochanan Ben
Phineas, governor of the seals; Ahijah, set over the drink-offerings:
Matthiah Ben Samuel, that presided over the lots," &c. But to me it
seems beyond all doubt that the captains of the Temple were the
captains of the several watches. "In three places the priests kept watch
and ward in the Temple, viz. in Beth Abtines, Beth Nitsots, and Beth
Mokad. The Levites also in one-and-twenty places more." Whereas,
therefore, these watches or guards consisted every one of several
persons, there was one single person set over each of them as their
captain, or the head of that watch. And this way looks that of Pilate,
Matthew 27:65; ye have a watch of your own; let some of them
be sent to guard the sepulchre.
III. The captain of the Temple,
therefore, distinctively and by way of eminence so termed, I would
suppose him, whom they called the ruler of the mountain of the house,
who was the chief of all the heads of those wards. "The ruler of the
mountain of the Temple takes his walks through every watch with
torches lighted before him: and if he found any upon the watch that
might not be standing on his feet, he said, 'Peace be with thee!' But if
he found him sleeping, he struck him with a stick; and it was
warrantable for him to burn the garments of such a one. And when it was
said by others, 'What is that noise in the court?' the answer was made,
'It is the noise of a Levite under correction, and whose garments are
burning, for that he slept upon the watch.' R. Eliezer Ben Jacob said,
'They once found my mother's son asleep, and they burnt his clothes.'"
Compare this passage with
Revelation 16:15: "Behold I come as a thief; blessed is he that
watcheth, and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked, and they see his
shame."
It is easy distinguishing this
captain of the mountain of the Temple from the ruler of the
Temple or the sagan. The former presided only over the
guards; the latter over the whole service of the Temple. And so we have
them distinguished,
Acts 4:1: there is the captain of the Temple, and Annas, who
was the sagan.
19. And he took bread, and gave
thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body
which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.
[This is my body.] The words of
the institution of the holy eucharist throughout the whole contain a
reflection, partly by way of antithesis, partly by way of allusion.
I. This is my body. Upon the
account of their present celebration of the Passover, these words might
very well have some reference to the body of the Paschal lamb: the
body (I say) of the Paschal lamb. For the Jews use this very
phrase concerning it: "They bring in a table spread, on which are bitter
herbs, with other herbs, unleavened bread, pottage, and the body of
the Paschal Lamb." And a little after: he eateth of the body of
the Passover. From whence our Saviour's meaning may be well enough
discerned; viz. that by the same signification that the Paschal lamb was
my body hitherto, from henceforward let this bread be my body.
II. Which is given for you. But
the apostle adds, "Which is broken for you": which, indeed, doth
not so well agree with the Paschal lamb as with the lamb for the daily
sacrifice. For as to the Paschal lamb, there was not a bone of it
broken; but that of the daily sacrifice was broken and cut
into several parts; and yet they are both of them the body of Christ in
a figure. And although, besides the breaking of it, there are
these further instances wherein the Paschal lamb and that of the daily
sacrifice did differ, viz., 1. that the daily sacrifice was for all
Israel, but the Paschal for this or that family: 2. the daily sacrifice
was for the atonement of sin; the Passover not so: 3. the daily
sacrifice was burnt, but the Passover eaten: yet in this they agreed,
that under both the body of our Saviour was figured and shadowed out,
though in a different notion.
III. This do in remembrance of me.
As you kept the Passover in remembrance of your going out of
Egypt. "Thou shalt remember the day of thy going out of Egypt all the
days of thy life. Ben Zuma thus explains it; The days of thy life, that
is, in the day time: all the days of thy life, that is, in the night
time too. But the wise men say, The days of thy life, that is, in this
age: all the days of thy life, that the days of the Messiah may be
included too." But whereas, in the days of the Messiah there was a
greater and more illustrious redemption and deliverance than that out of
Egypt brought about; with the Jews' good leave, it is highly requisite,
that both the thing itself and he that accomplished it should be
remembered. We suspect in our notes upon
1 Corinthians 11, as if some of the Corinthians, in their very
participation of the holy eucharist, did so far Judaize, that what had
been instituted for the commemoration of their redemption by the death
of Christ, they perverted to the commemoration of the going out of
Egypt; and that they did not at all 'discern the Lord's body' in the
sacrament.
Under the law there were several
eatings of holy things. The first was that which Siphra mentions,
when the priests eat of the sacrifice, and atonement is made for him
that brings it. There were other eatings, viz., of the festival
sacrifices of the tenths, thanksgiving-offerings, &c., which were to be
eaten by those that brought them; but these all now have their period:
and now, Do ye this, and do it in remembrance of me.
IV. This cup...which is shed for you.
This seems to have reference to that cup of wine that was every
day poured out in the drink offerings with the daily sacrifice; for that
also was poured out for the remission of sins. So that the bread may
have reference to the body of the daily sacrifice, and the cup to
the wine of the drink offering.
V. My blood of the new testament.
So St. Matthew and St. Mark with reference to "the blood of bulls and of
goats," with which the old testament was confirmed,
Exodus 24;
Hebrews 9:19.
VI. The new testament in my blood.
So our evangelist and so the apostle,
1 Corinthians 11 with reference to the whole ministry of the altar,
where blood was poured out; nay, with respect to the whole Jewish
religion, for here was the beginning or entry of the new covenant. And
indeed it seems that the design of that frequent communion of the Lord's
supper in the first ages of the church, among other things, was, that
those who were converted from Judaism might be sealed and confirmed
against Judaism; the sacrament itself being the mark of the cessation of
the old testament and the beginning of the new.
21. But, behold, the
hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the table.
[But, behold, the hand of him that
betrayeth me, &c.] What can be desired more as a demonstration that
Judas was present at the eucharist? And whereas the contrary is
endeavoured to be proved out of
John 13, nothing is made out of nothing: for there is not only
syllable throughout the whole chapter of the paschal supper, but of a
supper before the 'feast of the Passover.'
26. But ye shall not be
so: but he that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger; and he
that is chief, as he that doth serve.
[As the younger.] The vulgar and
interlinear, sicut junior. We, as the younger, very well.
For, as Beza hath it upon the place, it is properly to be understood
of age. I ask therefore,
I. Whether Peter was not the oldest of
the whole company? What reason can any have to deny this? It was
necessary that some one of them should be the first both in number and
order; and it was as fit and equal that the oldest amongst them should
be reckoned the first. And who will you say was older than Peter? Hence
was it that he had the first place in the catalogue of the apostles,
because he was the oldest. For this reason he sat at table in the
uppermost place next our Lord: for this reason did our Saviour so often
direct his discourse so immediately to him: and for this reason were his
answers to Christ taken in the name of all the rest, viz., because the
oldest. Which brings to mind the interpreter of the doctor in the
school of the Rabbins, who was the interlocutor between the master and
the disciples, and for that reason the chief in the school, but without
any primacy. Whereas therefore St. Peter, after our Saviour's ascension
into heaven, was (to speak vulgarly) the prolocutor in that
sacred college, what more probable reason can be offered why he was so,
than this seniority? Were not others as capable as speaking as he? had
they not equal authority, zeal, faith, knowledge with him, &c.? but he
indeed was the eldest man.
II. I cannot therefore but suspect from
the proper signification of the word younger, (to which the
greater, respecting age, does answer) that some one amongst them had
been challenging some privilege and primacy to himself upon the account
of seniority: and unless any can make it out that there was somebody
older than Peter, pardon me, if I think that he was the chief in this
contention, and that it was chiefly moved betwixt himself and the two
sons of Zebedee. For it seems unlikely that the other nine would have
contended for the primacy with Peter, James, and John; whom Christ had
so peculiarly distinguished in their presence with marks of his favour.
So that the struggle seems to be especially between these three and
Peter the beginner of the strife: which appears, partly in that our
Saviour rebukes him by name, and partly in that he could not forget
without some grudge, that request of the two brothers, "Lord, let us sit
one on thy right hand the other on thy left."
31. And the Lord said, Simon, Simon,
behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you
as wheat.
[Simon, Simon.] Let us change
the name and person: "Thomas, Thomas"; or "Philip, Philip, Satan hath
desired, &c.; but I have prayed," &c. And who would from hence have
picked out an argument for the primacy of Thomas or Philip over the rest
of the apostles and the universal church? And yet this do the Romanists
in the behalf of Peter. Who would not have taken it rather as a severe
chiding? As if he should have said, "Thou, Thomas or Philip, art thou so
hot in contending for the primacy, while Satan is so hot against all of
you? And whilst you are at strife amongst yourselves, he is at strife
against you all!" Under such a notion as this I doubt not our Saviour
did speak to Peter, and that in these words he found a severe reprimand
rather than any promotion to the primacy.
32. But I have prayed for thee, that
thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy
brethren.
[That thy faith fail not.] There
seems an emphasis in the word faith. As to the other apostles,
indeed, that Christian courage and magnanimity which they ought to have
exerted in that difficult time did fail them; but their faith was
nothing so near shipwreck as Peter's faith was. They indeed deserted
their Master and fled,
Mark 14:50: which they seem to have not done without some connivance
from himself,
John 18:8. But when Peter renounced and abjured his Lord, how near
was he becoming an apostate, and his faith from suffering a total
shipwreck? Certainly it was Peter's advantage that Christ prayed for
him; but it was not so much for his honour, that he, beyond all others,
should stand in need of such a prayer.
36. Then said he unto them, But now,
he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his
scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.
[Let him sell his garment, and buy a
sword.] Doth our Saviour give them this counsel in good earnest?
I. He uses the common dialect. For so
also the Rabbins in other things: "He that hath not wherewithal to eat,
but upon mere alms, let him beg or sell his garments to buy oil and
candles for the feast of Dedication," &c.
II. He warns them of a danger that is
very near; and in a common way of speech lets them know that they had
more need of providing swords for their defence against the common
enemy, than be any way quarrelling amongst themselves. No so much
exhorting them to repel force with force, as to give them such an
apprehension of the common rage of their enemies against them, that
might suppress all private animosities amongst themselves.
37. For I say unto you,
that this that is written must yet be accomplished in me, And he was
reckoned among the transgressors: for the things concerning me have an
end.
[For the things concerning me have
an end.] That is, "My business is done, yours is but beginning.
While I was present, the children of the bridechamber had no reason to
weep; but when I am taken away, and numbered amongst the transgressors,
think what will be done to you, and what ought to be done by you; and
then think if this be a time for you to be contending with one another."
43. And there appeared an angel unto
him from heaven, strengthening him.
[An angel strengthening him.] I.
In his temptations in the wilderness there was no angel by him; for St.
Matthew saith, chapter 4:11, "Then the devil leaveth him, and, behold,
angels came and ministered unto him": that is, not till the devil had
first left him. But in the midst of this trial there was an 'angel
strengthening him': and why so? By reason of his agony, you will say,
and that very truly: but whence arose this agony? and of what kind was
it? It was occasioned (you will say) from a sense of divine indignation
and wrath. This dare not I say or imagine, that God was angry or
conceived any indignation against him at all. And if the anguish and
agony of his mind was the result of the divine wrath pressing in upon
him, I do not see what kind of comfort an angel could minister against
the wrath of God. It is rather an argument God was not angry with him,
when he sent an angel to comfort him.
II. It is not to be doubted, but that
Christ was now wrestling with a furious enraged devil; yea, a devil
loosed from his chain, and permitted, without any check or restraint
from divine providence, to exert all his force and rage against him:
which was permitted by God, not from any displeasure against his Son,
but that even human nature might, by this her combatant, get a conquest
over this insulting enemy. For it had been a small thing to have
vanquished the devil by mere divine power.
III. However therefore it is not here
related in express terms, yet could I easily persuade myself, that the
devil might at this time appear to our Saviour in some visible shape.
When he tempted him in the wilderness, he put on the disguise of some
good angel, or rather some kind of resemblance of the Holy Ghost. But in
this last temptation he puts on himself, and appears in his own colours;
viz. in some direful formidable figure, on purpose to terrify our Lord.
And from thence it was that he began to be sore amazed, and to be
very heavy,
Mark 14:33; and here to be in an agony. Nor do I rashly, and
without any ground, suppose this, but upon these reasons:
I. Whereas that old dragon assaulted
the first Adam in a garden in a visible shape; it is not absurd to
imagine, he did so now to the second Adam, in a garden, in a visible
shape.
II. This our evangelist tells us
concerning his temptation in the wilderness, that "when the devil had
ended all the temptation, he departed from him, for a season."
Here he takes the season to return; and I see no reason why he
should not at this time, as well as in the wilderness, assume some
visible shape. Then, indeed, he addressed himself in a charming and
grateful shape, to have enticed and deceived him; but now in a frightful
and horrid one, to have amazed and terrified him. He had already
experienced how vain a thing it was to go about to cheat and allure him:
what remained therefore but to shake his mind (if possible) with fright
and terror?
III. For when he had no greater
invention in his whole storehouse, by which he could distress and shake
the minds of mortals, than the horrid apparition of himself, none will
conceive he would neglect this engine, that if it could be, he might
disturb his soul through his eye. That, therefore, which the Jews feign
or dream about Solomon, that he saw the angel of death (that is, the
devil) gnashing his teeth, and that a disciple of Rabbi did so too, I
suppose acted in good earnest here; namely, that Christ saw the devil,
that old dragon, gaping at him with all horror he could put on. And in
this sense would I understand that of the "messenger of Satan buffeting
the apostle": viz. that the devil did appear visibly to him in some
frightful shape, to afflict and terrify him. And perhaps that vehement
desire he had to sift the disciples (v 31) respects this same thing,
namely, that he might be permitted to assault them with such kind of
affrightments.
44. And being in an agony he prayed
more earnestly: and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood
falling down to the ground.
[His sweat was as it were great
drops of blood.] Diodorus Siculus, speaking of a country where
Alexander the Great had to do with Porus, hath this passage; "There are
serpents there which, by their bites would occasion most bitter
deaths: they are horrible pains that afflict any that are struck by
them, and an issue of sweat, like blood, seizeth them." I would
ascribe this bloody sweat of our Saviour to the bite of that old
serpent, rather than to the apprehension of divine wrath.
[For more info, please see
Appendix VII: Heart Rupture: A Possible Cause of the Lord's Death?
by Arthur C. Custance.]
47. And while he yet spake, behold a
multitude, and he that was called Judas, one of the twelve, went before
them, and drew near unto Jesus to kiss him.
[To kiss him.] Our Saviour had
to do with a frightful and terrifying devil; but this traitor seems
possessed with a tame and gentle one. He converses with the apostles,
and there is no token of a devil dwelling in him. He is present at the
Passover, at the eucharist, and the very lips of Christ, and still no
sign of Satan being his inmate. But when once the devil hath done his
work by thee, then, Judas, take heed of thy devil.
As to this treacherous contrivance of
Judas, let us frame the most gentle opinion of it that the matter can
bear: for instance, that he might perhaps think with himself, that it
was not possible for Christ to be apprehended by the Jews, having
already seen him working such stupendous miracles, and more than once
strangely delivering himself from them: and grant further, that when he
said to them, "Whomsoever I shall kiss, that is he, lay hold of
him," he said it scoffingly, as believing they could not be able to lay
hold on him: grant we, in a word, that when he saw him condemned, he
repented himself, having never suspected that matters would have gone so
far, presuming that Christ would easily have made his escape from them,
and himself should have got thirty pieces of silver by the bargain: let
us grant, I say, that this was his contrivance, and colour it over with
as plausible excuses as we can; yet certainly was there never any thing
so impiously done by mortal man, than for him thus to play with the Holy
of Holies, and endeavour to make merchandise of the Son of God. However,
I suspect much worse things hatched in the breast of this traitor: viz.
that Christ did really not please him; and, with the great chiefs of
that nation, though he supposed him the true Messiah, yet not such a one
as answered their carnal expectation.
The Rabbins distinguish between
lawful kisses and kisses of folly; saying, that "all
kisses are kisses of folly excepting three": which they there
reckon up. But what kind of kiss was this? a kiss of folly?
Alas! it is too low and dwarfish a term for this gigantic monster.
53. When I was daily with you in the
temple, ye stretched forth no hands against me: but this is your hour,
and the power of darkness.
[This is your hour, and the power of
darkness.] The serpent himself is now come in Judas; and the seed of
the serpent was that rout that came with him, to whom it was fatal to
bruise the heel of the Messiah; and now was the hour for that
wickedness. It was anciently foretold and predetermined, both as to the
thing itself and the instruments; and now all fences lie open, and you
may do what you please. The chains of the devil himself are now loosed;
and it is permitted to him, without the least check or restraint of
Divine Providence, to exert all his furies at pleasure; for now is the
power of darkness.
Darkness, is the devil among the
allegorists. "It is said, On the first day of the creation, the angel of
death [i.e. the devil] was created, according as it is written, There
was darkness upon the face of the deep; that is, the angel of death, who
darkeneth the eyes of men."
2. And they began to
accuse him, saying, We found this fellow perverting the nation,
and forbidding to give tribute to Caesar, saying that he himself is
Christ a King.
[We found this fellow perverting the
nation.] "A disciple corrupting his food publicly, as did Jesus
of Nazareth." 'To corrupt their food publicly,' is a phrase amongst
the Rabbins to denote a mingling of true doctrine with heresy, and the
true worship of God with idolatry. This was the accusation they framed
against our Saviour at this time, that he taught heterodox and
destructive principles, such especially as would tend to turn off and
alienate the people from their obedience to the Romans. Aruch recites
this passage of the Talmud more cautiously; for instead of as Jesus
of Nazareth did, he hath it, as Jeroboam did.
7. And as soon as he knew that he
belonged unto Herod's jurisdiction, he sent him to Herod, who himself
also was at Jerusalem at that time.
[He sent him to Herod.] Did
Pilate do this as yielding to Herod a jurisdiction in capital matters
within the city of Jerusalem upon those that were Galileans? Probably he
did it, either in flattery to the tyrant, or else that he might throw
off from himself both the trouble and the odium that might arise upon
the occasion of condemning Jesus, whom he judged to be an innocent man,
and whom in some measure he pitied, looking upon him as a sort of a
delirant person, one not very well in his wits: which opinion also
Herod seems to have conceived of him, by putting upon him that fool's
coat wherewith he clothed him: which I should willingly enough render
white and shining, but that I observe our evangelist, when he hath
occasion to mention such a garment, calls it a white and shining robe
expressly. Chapter 9:29, his garment was white and glistering:
Acts 1:10, two men in white apparel.
30. Then shall they begin to say to
the mountains, Fall on us; and to the hills, Cover us.
[Then shall they begin to say to the
mountains, &c.] So they do say,
Revelation 6:6: from whence, among other arguments, it may be
reasonably supposed, that that chapter treats of the plagues and
afflictions that should forerun the destruction of Jerusalem, and,
indeed, the destruction and overthrow itself. Weigh the place
accurately; and perhaps thou wilt be of the same mind too. Nay, I may
further add, that perhaps this observation might not a little help (if
my eyes fail me not) in discovering the method of the author of the Book
of the Revelation.
31. For if they do these things in a
green tree, what shall be done in the dry?
[If they do these things in a green
tree, &c.] Consult John Baptist's expression,
Matthew 3:10; "Now also the axe is laid to the root of the
tree," viz., then when the Jewish nation was subdued to the
government of the Romans, who were about to destroy it. And if they deal
thus with me, a green and flourishing tree, what will they
do with the whole nation, a dry and sapless trunk?
34. Then said Jesus, Father, forgive
them; for they know not what they do. And they parted his raiment, and
cast lots.
[They cast lots.] They cast
lots for his seamless coat,
John 19:23,24. Moses is supposed to have ministered in such a
garment: "In what kind of garment did Moses attend the seven days of
consecration? In a white vestment. Rabh Cahnah saith, In a
white vestment, wherein there was no seam." The Gloss is, "The whole
garment was made of one thread, and not as our clothes are, which have
their sleeves sewed to the body with a seam." But he gives a very
senseless reason why his coat was without a seam; viz., to avoid the
suspicion lest Moses should at any time hide any consecrated money
within the seams of his coat.
36. And the soldiers also mocked
him, coming to him, and offering him vinegar,
[They brought him vinegar.]
Vinegar was the common drink of the Roman soldiers; and hence those
to whom the custody of crucified persons was committed had it always
ready by them. "He commanded that no soldier should drink wine in their
expedition, but that every one should content himself with vinegar."
"The provision this man (viz.
Misitheus) made in the commonwealth was such, that there never was
any great frontier-city which had not vinegar, bread-corn, and
bacon, and barley, and chaff, laid up for a whole year," &c. "Thou shalt
give us as much hay, chaff, vinegar, herbs, and grass, as may
suffice us."
Hence it may become less difficult to
reconcile the evangelist amongst themselves, speaking of wine
given him mixed with myrrh, and of vinegar too; viz., a
twofold cup: one, before he was nailed to the cross, i.e. of wine
mingled with myrrh; the other, of vinegar, while he hung
there: the first, given by the Jews according to their custom; the
second, by the soldiers, in abuse and mockery. But if you will grant a
third cup, then all difficulty vanisheth indeed. Let the first be
wine mingled with myrrh; the second, vinegar mingled with gall;
the third, mere vinegar: which the soldiers gave to malefactors
if they had desired drink, being that which they drank themselves. Hence
the vessel filled with vinegar, was always in readiness, that the
soldiers might drink when they had a mind, and persons also upon the
cross, if they stood in need of it.
42. And he said unto
Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom.
[Lord, remember me.] Christ is
now upon the cross, as of old Joseph was in the prison, between two
malefactors. There one of them was delivered, the other hanged; here one
obtains salvation, the other perisheth. The faith of this thief is
admirable; and kept even pace with that of the apostles, if, in some
circumstances, it did not go beyond it. The apostles acknowledged 'Jesus
to be the Messiah'; and so doth he: with this addition, which I question
whether they did so clearly own and know or no, viz., that Christ should
reign and have his kingdom after his death. He seems to have a sounder
judgment concerning Christ's kingdom than the apostles themselves, as
may be gathered from their question,
Acts 1:6.
It pleased God, in this last article of
time, to glorify the riches of his grace in a singular and extraordinary
manner, both in the conversion of a sinner and the forgiveness of his
sins: I say in such an article of time which the world had never before
seen, nor ever was like to see again; viz., in the very instant wherein
the Messiah was finishing his redemption. It was not unknown to either
of the thieves that Jesus was therefore condemned to die because he had
professed himself 'the Christ'; hence that of the impenitent malefactor,
"If thou art Christ, save thyself and us." And if the penitent thief did
for a while join with the other in his petulant reproaches (which seems
intimated to us
Matthew 27:44), yet was his heart touched at length, and, perhaps,
upon his observation of that miraculous darkness which at that time had
covered the world.
43. And Jesus said unto him, Verily
I say unto thee, Today shall thou be with me in paradise.
[Today shalt thou be with me in
paradise.] I. Let us here first consider the phrase in paradise:
in common Jewish speech, in the garden of Eden. In what sense we
may collect from these following passages: "The Rabbins have a
tradition. There are four that went into paradise: namely, Ben Azzai,
Ben Zumah, Acher, and R. Akibah. R. Akibah saith unto them, 'When you
come to the stones of pure marble, do not ye say Waters, waters
[i.e. Alas! these waters will hinder us from going forward]; for it is
written, He that telleth lies shall not dwell in my presence [now, it
would be a lie to call white marble water].'" "Ben Azzai looked with
some curiosity about him, and died: of him the Scripture speaks,
'Precious in the eyes of the Lord is the death of his saints.' Ben Zumah
looked with some curiosity about him, and he was disturbed in his
intellectuals: of him the Scripture speaketh, 'Hast thou found
honey? eat so much as is sufficient for thee, lest thou be filled
therewith, and vomit it.'"
Aruch, reciting these words,
saith, "It is called paradise, under the signification of the garden
of Eden, which is reserved for the just. This place is in the
heavens, where the souls of the just are gathered together." And the
Talmudical Gloss hath it much to the same sense: "These four, by God's
procurement, went up into the firmament."
While we are reading these passages,
that story may easily occur to mind of St. Paul's being "caught up into
paradise,"
2 Corinthians 12; and perhaps the legend before us is but the ape of
that story. In the story it is observable, that paradise and the
'third heaven' are one and the same thing: in the legend paradise
and the highest heavens. For so the doctors comment upon the word
in
Psalm 68:5: "There are seven classes or degrees of just persons, who
see the face of God, sit in the house of God, ascend up unto the hill of
God, &c. And to every class or degree there is allotted their proper
dwellingplace in paradise. There are also seven abiding places in
hell. Those that dwell in paradise, they shine like the shining of
the firmament, like the sun, like the moon, like the firmament, like
the stars, like lightning, like the lilies, like burning lamps."
II. Our Saviour, therefore, telling the
penitent thief, This day shalt thou be with me in paradise, he
speaks in the common dialect, and to the capacity of the thief; viz.,
that he should be in heaven with Christ, and with all just persons that
had left this world. Nor, indeed, would I fetch the explication of that
article of our creed, He descended into hell, from any passage in
the Scripture sooner than this here: adding this, that we must of
necessity have recourse to the Greek tongue for the signification of the
word, which they generally use to denote the state of the dead,
as well the blessed as the miserable. Those who expound that passage in
1 Peter 3:19, of his going down from the cross into hell to preach
to the spirits in prison there, do very little regard the scope of the
apostle, and are absolute strangers to his meaning in it. For,
1. In that he shuts up the generation
before the flood in an infernal prison, he falls in with the received
opinion of that nation, which was, that that generation had no part in
the world to come; and that they were condemned to boiling waters in
hell.
2. He compares the present generation
of the Jews with that generation before the flood; that Christ did of
old preach even to that generation, and so he hath done to this; that
that generation perished through its disobedience, and so will this. He
runs much upon the same parallel in his second Epistle, chapter 3:6, &c.
We must observe, that the apostle makes his transition from the
crucifixion and resurrection of our Saviour directly to the generation
before the flood, passing over all those generations that came between,
on purpose that he might make the comparison betwixt that and the age he
lived in.
53. And he took it down, and wrapped
it in linen, and laid it in a sepulchre that was hewn in stone, wherein
never man before was laid.
[Wrapped it in linen.] "Mar
Zutra saith, that out of the linen in which they wrapped up books,
when it grew old they made shrouds for the dead of the precept; for this
is to their disgrace." The Gloss adds, "That they do it of the linen
wherein they fold up the book of the Law." Him who had suffered death by
the sentence of the Sanhedrim, or magistrate, they were wont to call
the dead of the precept, because he was executed according to the
precept: and such a one to them was our Jesus. Now as to one that was
condemned to death by the magistrate, they had an opinion that by how
much the more disgracefully they dealt with him, by so much the greater
atonement was made for him. Hence that expression, "They did not
openly bewail him, that that very setting him at nought" (no man
lamenting him) "might redound to his atonement." And from thence,
perhaps, if the women at Jerusalem had bewailed any other person as they
bewailed our Saviour, that other person might have said, "Ye daughters
of Jerusalem, weep not for me, lest ye cut short my atonement": but
Christ speaks to them upon a far different account. And under this
notion they wrapped one that had been so executed, in some ragged, torn,
old, dirty windingsheets; that this disgrace, being thrown upon him,
might augment his expiation. But this good Arimathean behaves himself
otherwise with Jesus, as having conceived quite another opinion
concerning him.
54. And that day was the
preparation, and the sabbath drew on.
[And the sabbath drew on.] The
vulgar reads, the sabbath began to dawn: not ill rendered. Beza
reads, and the sabbath succeeded: not properly. One would have
thought it would have been more congruously said, it began to be dark
towards the sabbath: for the night before the sabbath was coming on:
but,
I. The sabbatical candles that were
lighted in honour of the sabbath were now set up. "There are three
things which it is necessary a man should warn those of his own house of
on the evening of the sabbath, when night is coming on: Have you paid
your tenths? Have you begun your Erubhick society? Light up your
candle." "Men and women are bound to light up a candle in their
houses upon the sabbath day. If a man hath not bread to eat, yet he must
beg from door to door to get a little oil to set up his light." These
things being noted, the evangelist may not be improperly understood
thus, "The sabbath began to shine with the lights set up"; respect being
had to these sabbath candles. But I do not acquiesce here.
II. The evening of the sabbath was
called amongst the Jews light. By the light of the fourteenth
day they make a search for leaven by the light of a candle. By the light
of the fourteenth day; that is, on the evening, or in the night that
immediately precedes that day. So Rambam upon the place, "the search
for leaven is in the night of the fourteenth day, although the
eating of leavened bread is not forbidden before the noon of the
fourteenth day. But they instituted this because it is most convenient
searching in the night time by candlelight; and at that time also all
persons are at home."
"The woman that miscarries on the light
[i.e. the evening] of the eighty-first day, the Shammean school absolves
her from any offering: but the school of Hillel doth not." The Gloss
hath it, on the light of the eighty-fist day, i.e. in the
night of the eighty-first day. The question disputed there is: "The
woman that had been brought to bed of a girl was bound to the
purification of eighty days"; when those days were at an end, then she
was bound to offer,
Leviticus 12:5,6. Now therefore seeing the oblation was to be
brought on the eighty-first day, the question is, What if the woman
should happen to miscarry within the very night that begins the
eighty-first day, must she the next day offer one or two sacrifices? one
for the girl, and one for that of which she hath miscarried? The
Shammean school will have but one, but the school of Hillel saith two.
Pesikta speaking concerning a
vowed sacrifice, from
Leviticus 7:17, hath this passage: "Perhaps it may be eaten on the
light [i.e. the evening] of the third day. The text saith upon the
third day; it is eaten until the third day. It is not eaten on
the light [i.e. the evening, or the night] of the third day":
for then the third day was actually begun. But now in this phrase they
restrain the word especially to the beginning of the night, though
sometimes it is taken for the whole night, as in that tradition newly
quoted concerning the woman that miscarried: and so the Gloss upon
Pesachin. Maimonides discoursing about putting away the leaven which
ought to be on the light of the fourteenth day, i.e. on the night
that begins the fourteenth day, hath this passage; "By prescription of
the scribes they search for, and cast out their leaven in the night;
namely, the beginning of that night that ushers in the fourteenth day."
Much to the same sense the Gemarist concerning the light: "How
comes twilight to be called light? From thence, because it is
written, In the twilight, in the evening, of the day,"
Proverbs 7:9. Rambam thinks it so called by a rule of contraries;
for so he in Pesachin: "The night is called light, by the
same rule that they call many other things by their contraries."
But the Gemarists upon the place affirm
that the evening is not improperly called light, and prove it
from that expression,
Psalm 148:3: Praise him all ye stars of light. However
unsuitably therefore it might sound in the ears of Greeks or Latins,
when they hear the evening or the beginning of the night expressed by
the light of the sabbath, yet with the Jews it was a way of
expression very usual: and they could readily understand the evangelist
speaking in their own vulgar way, when he would tell us the night of
the sabbath drew on; but expresseth it by the light of the
sabbath began to shine.
56. And they returned, and prepared
spices and ointments; and rested the sabbath day according to the
commandment.
[And rested the sabbath day.] If
our Saviour was taken down from the cross about sunset, as it was
provided,
Deuteronomy 21:23;
Joshua 8:29, then had the women this interim of time to buy their
spices and despatch other business before the entry of the sabbath day.
I. Between the suns. So they
called that space of time that was between the setting of the sun and
the appearance of any star.
II. Might they not have that space of
time also that was between the first and second star? We may judge
something from this passage: "In the evening of the sabbath, if he see
one star and do any work, he is acquitted; but if he see two stars, let
him bring his trespass-offering."
III. Might they not have some farther
allowance in the case of funerals? We may judge from this passage: "they
do all works necessary about the dead [on the sabbath day]; they
anoint him, they wash him, provided only that they do not stir a limb of
him," &c. It was not safe for those women to shew themselves too busy in
preparing for his interment; especially seeing Jesus died as a
malefactor, and was odious to the people: this might exasperate the
people against them, and so much the more too, if they should, in the
least measure, violate the sabbath day. But further, besides the honour
they gave to the sabbath, it was not prudence in them to break it for a
work which they thought they might as well do when the sabbath was done
and over.
Table of Contents
