Works
It seems therefore that they led Jesus to Annas first, that Caiaphas might be directed by his counsel; himself being but little versed in things of this nature might proceed in this affair by the steerage of his Father-in-law. And let this High Priest pardon me if I ascribe that sentence of his, It is expedient that one man should die for the people, and not that the whole Nation perish, not to his prudence and gravity, but to his rashness and cruelty; although the Holy Spirit directed it to its proper end which the High Priest himself did not dream of.
There might be another reason why they led Christ before Annas first, but that I shall speak of anon.
If the Gloss I had upon these very same words, Chap. XI. 51. will not so well fit here, as they did there, we may add this also, which will suit well enough in both places; that is, that there was so great a vicissitude and change in the High Priesthood, there being a new High Priest almost every year, that it was not unnecessary to set down this particular circumstance, Caiaphas was High Priest for that year.
In the second Temple which stood but 420 years, there were more than three hundred High Priests within that time. Of these 420 years deduct those forty wherein Simeon the Just ministered, and those eighty wherein Johanan sat, and those ten wherein Ishmael ben Phabi, and as it is said, those eleven wherein Eleazar ben Harsom governed, and then reckon and you will find that hardly any other High Priest sat out his whole year.
But this number of High Priests is very much lessened in Vajicra rabba , Under the first Temple, because they that served therein served in the truth; there were but eighteen High Priests, the Father, and Son, and Grandson successively. But under the second Temple when that honor came to be obtained by money [there are also that say how they murdered one another by charms and witchcrafts] there were fourscore High Priests served in that time; fourscore and one, say some; fourscore and two say others, and there are that say fourscore and four. Amongst these, Simeon the Just sat forty years; but when the place was bought and sold, the years of enjoying it were cut short. The story goes of one that sent his Son with two bushels of silver, [to purchase the High Priests office] and the bushels themselves were silver. Another sent his Son with two bushels of gold, and the bushels themselves were of gold too.
As to this difference of numbers we will not much trouble our heads about it; perhaps the Gemarists might reckon the Sagans together with the High Priests, for they were indeed deputed to minister in their stead, if any uncleanness had happened to them. Let there be fourscore High Priests or thereabouts, it is certain, that so frequent were the changes and successions amongst them that the High Priest of this year was hardly so the year that went before or that followed after. Although indeed in this Caiaphas it was something otherwise, yet did the Evangelist justly and properly enough add this clause, That he was the High Priest for that year, thereby tacitly noting the common state of affairs as to the office of High Priest at that time.
VERS. XV.
THERE are some that apprehend in this place some interruption in the order of the story, they would therefore have the 24 ver. weav'd in here. Annas sent Jesus bound to Caiaphas, because what is here related, and so on, seems all to have been done in Caiaphas his Hall, and not in Annas 's.
This order the Syr. Arab. Interpreters and others do still observe; Nonnus, Carthus. Bez. and as he quotes him, St. Cyril invert it. It is true, there is here a tacit transition, and a trajection of the words in ver. 24. which is not very usual; but neither the one nor the other seems to be without some reason for it.
I. It is told us, Mat. XXVI. 56. and Mark XIV. 50. That all his Disciples forsook him and fled. So that probably Peter and that other Disciple was amongst the number, when it is said, they all fled; the transition of our Evangelist therefore seems to teach us, that neither Peter, nor the other Disciple followed Christ to Annas his house, but being surprised and confounded with a very great fear, hid themselves for a while, and (not till after some time) recollecting themselves, they put forward amongst the crowd to Caiaphas his Hall, or else came thither after them.
II. Annas alone could determine nothing judicially concerning Christ; for when an enquiry must be made concerning his Disciples, and the nature of his Doctrines, when witnesses must be produced pro and con; this necessarily required a Session of the Sanhedrin. He sent him therefore to Caiaphas where the Sanhedrin also was, and the Evangelist lets the mention of that alone till he came to relate their way of proceeding.
But why or by what right should Annas be absent from the Sanhedrin? Could there be any right or legal proceeding in the Great Council, if the whole number of Seventy one Elders were not complete? Let Maimonides give the answer , It is not necessary that the whole Bench of Seventy one should all sit together in their places in the Temple, when it is necessary for them all to meet let them be called together, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 but at other times if any one of them have any business of his own, he may go out and do his affairs and return again. This provision is made that there might never be fewer than Twenty three sitting together during the whole Session. If any have occasion to go forth let him look about him, and see if there be Twenty three of his Colleagues in the Court, then he may go out, if not, he must stay till some other enter. We give another reason of Annas his absence by and by.
Nonnus supposes that other Disciple known to the High Priest, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , from his fishing trade; others guess other reasons; but to determine anything in this matter would look rashly. However this knowledge of the High Priest came about, it is certain this Disciple had the greater opportunity 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to have stood in the defense of his Master as a witness in his behalf. For,
〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Capital judgments begin always on the defendants side, and not on the accusers. It is lawful for all to plead on the defendants side, not so of the accusers.
They begin on the defendants side. One of the witnesses saith, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 I have something to say in his defense. If any of his Disciples say, I have wherewith to accuse him, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 they enjoin him silence. If the Disciple say▪ I can offer something in his defense, they call him up, and place him among themselves, and suffer him not to go down thence the whole day after.
Did they thus proceed with our Savior? did they endeavor first for the clearing his innocence, and were there any witnesses produced for this purpose? If so, then here were Peter and that other Disciple, who could have witness'd in his behalf, but Peter denies that he ever knew him.
VERS. XVIII.
IT was the very dead of night, almost at Cock-crowing. Our Country-man Biddulph, who was at Jerusalem, at the very time when they were wont to celebrate the Passover, gives us the reason of this cold by his own experience. He acknowledgeth indeed that he found it so hot at that time, as we usually feel it in our own Country about Mid-summer, that he could not but wonder how Peter at that time of the year should be so cold, but within a few days his doubt was resolved, for there were mighty dews fell, which not being wholly dried up by the Sun, made it very cold, especially in the night, &c.
Nay the Traditional Fathers suppose there may be Frost and Snow in the time of Passover, by that Canon of theirs, They do not intercalate the year 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 either for Snow or for Frost.
The intercalation of the year respected chiefly the Paschal solemnity; namely that by the interposing of the intercalated month, all things might be ripe, and fit for that Feast. If when it came to the month Nisan, the Barley was not yet ripe enough to offer the sheaf of the first-fruits, then they put a month between, which they called the second Adar. So, if the ways were so bad, that people could not travel up to Jerusalem; if the Bridges were so broken, that they could not pass the Rivers; they intercalated or put a month between, that at the coming in of the month Nisan, everything might be ready that was requisite for the Paschal solemnity. But if Frost or Snow should happen when Nisan was entering in its ordinary course, they did not put a month between upon that account. From whence it is plain that Frost and Snow did sometimes happen at that time.
VERS. XXI.
JESUS seems to appeal to the common right and rule amongst themselves. He desires that the witnesses in behalf of the defendant might be heard first. [But who, Alas! was there that durst witness for him?] It is said indeed, That the Chief Priests, and Elders, and whole Council sought false witness against him, Matth. XXVI. 59. But did they seek for any true witness on his side? or do they indeed deal with the witnesses against him, as their customs obliged them to have done? did they search their testimony by a strict and severe Examination, did they terrify them 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or by grave Exhortations admonish them to say nothing but the truth? This by right ought to have been done. But we have reason to suppose it was not done.
VERS. XXVIII.
I. WE have already shewn in our Notes upon Mark XIV. 12. that the eating of the Paschal Lamb, was never upon any occasion whatever transferred from the Evening of the fourteenth day drawing to the close of it; no not by reason of the Sabbath, or any uncleanness that had happened to the Congregation; so that there needs little argument to assure us, that the Jews eat the Lamb at the same time wherein Christ did. Only let me add this: Suppose they had entered Pilate 's House, and had defiled themselves by entering the house of an Heathen, yet might not that defilement come under the predicament of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ? If so, then they might wash themselves in the evening and be clean enough to eat the Paschal Lamb, if it had been to have been eaten on that evening, but they had eaten it the evening before.
II. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , The Passover, therefore here doth not signify the Paschal Lamb, but the Paschal Chagigah, of which we will remark these two or three things:
1. Deut. XVI. 2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Thou shalt Sacrifice the Passover unto the Lord thy God, of the Flock and the Herd. Where R. Solomon, The Flocks are meant of the Lambs and the Kids; the Herd, of the Chagigah. And R. Bechai in loc. The Flocks 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 are for the due of the Passover; the Herd 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 for the Sacrifices of the Chagigah. So also R. Nachman. The Herd 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 for the celebration of the Chagigah. Pesachin . 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Flock for the Passover, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the Oxen for the Chagigah.
Where the Gloss, Pag. 1. Doth not th Passover consist wholly of Lambs and Kids? Exod. XII. 5. If so, why is it said 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Oxen? To equal everything that is used in the Passover. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 As the Passover [i. e. the Paschal Lamb] is of due, and is not taken but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 out of the common Flocks [neither from the first born, nor from the tenths] so this also [i. e. of the Oxen] is of due, and not taken, but out of the common Herd. See 2 Chron. XXX. 24, &c. and XXXV. 8, 9.
2. The Chagigah was for joy and mirth, according to that in Deut. XVI. 14. And thou shalt rejoice in the Feast, &c. Hence the Sacrifices that were prepared for that use, are called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Sacrifices of Peace, or Eucharistick Offerings, Sacrifices of joy and mirth.
3. The proper time of bringing the Chagigah, was the fifteenth day of the Month. Aruch in 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 they eat, and drank, and rejoiced, and were bound to bring their Sacrifice of Chagigah, on the fifteenth day. i e. The first day of the Feast, &c.
There might be a time indeed when they brought their Chagigah on the fourteenth day, but this was not so usual, and then it was under certain conditions. When is it that they bring the Chagigah at the same time with the Lamb? 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 When it comes on another day in the week, and not on the Sabbath, when it is clean, and when it is small. Let the Gloss explain the last clause, and for the two former we shall do that ourselves.
〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 If the Lamb be less than what will satisfy the whole company, then they make ready their Chagigah, eating that first, and then the Lamb, &c. And the reason is given by another Glosser, viz. That the appetites of those that eat might be pretty well satisfied, before they begin the Lamb; for if they should fall upon the Lamb first, it being so very small, and the company numerous and hungry, they would be in danger of breaking the bones, whiles they gnaw it so greedily.
For this and other reasons the Rabbins account the Chagigah of the fourteenth day to be many degrees less perfect, than that of the fifteenth, but it would be very tedious to quote their Ventilations about it. Take only these few instances.
R. Issai saith, the Chagigah on the fourteenth day, is not our duty. And a little after, R. Eliezer saith, by the Peace-Offerings, which they stay on the evening of the Feast, a man doth not his duty, either as to rejoicing, or as to Chagigah.
And now let us return to the words of our Evangelist.
III. It was the fifteenth day of the Month, when the Fathers of the Council refused to enter into the Pretorium, lest they should be defiled; for they would eat the Passover; that is the Chagigah.
1. The Evangelist expresseth it, after the common way of speaking, when he calls it the Passover. It is written, Observe the Month Abib: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And keep the Passover. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 That all that you do, may go under the denomination of the Passover. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Calf and the young Bullock which they kill in the name of the Passover. Or, for the Passover. Whence we may observe▪ The Calf is the Passover, as well as the Lamb.
2. The Elders of the Sanhedrin prepare, and oblige themselves to eat the Chagigah [the Passover] on that day, because the next day was the Sabbath; and the Chagihah must not make void the Sabbath.
〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Chagigah doth not set aside the Sabbath. Hence that we quoted before, that the Chagigah was not to be brought upon the Sabbath day, as also not in case of uncleanness: because however the Chagigah, and defilement might set aside the Passover, yet it might not the Sabbath.
VERS. XXXI.
DOTH Pilate jest or deride them, when he bids them take him and judge him according to their own Law? It cannot be denied but that all capital judgment, or sentence upon life, had been taken from the Jews, for above forty years before the destruction of Jerusalem, as they oftentimes themselves confess. But how came this to pass? It is commonly received, that the Romans, at this time the Jews Lord's and Masters, had taken from all their Courts a power and capacity of judging the capital matters. We have spoken largely upon this subject in our Notes upon Matth. XXVI. 3. Let us superadd a few things here.
Rabh Cahna saith, when R. Ishmael bar Jose lay sick, they sent to him saying, pray, Sir, tell us two or three things, which thou didst once tell us in the name of thy Father. He saith to them, an hundred and fourscore years, before the destruction of the Temple, the wicked Kingdom [the Roman Empire] reigned over Israel, fourscore years before the destruction of the Temple, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 they [the Fathers of the Sanhedrin] determined about the uncleanness of the Heathen Land, and about Glass Vessels. Forty years before the destruction of the Temple, the Sanhedrin removed, and sat in the Taberne. What is the meaning of this Tradition? Rabh Isaac bar Abdimi saith, they did not judge 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 judgments of Mulcts. The Gloss is, Those are the judgments about sinning any that offered violence, that entice a maid, and the price of a Servant—When therefore they did not sit in the room Gazith, they did not judge about these things, and so those judgments about mulcts or sines ceased.
Here we have one part of their judiciary power lost; not taken away from them by the Romans, but falling of itself, as it were, out of the hands of the Sanhedrin. Nor did the Romans indeed take away their power of judging in capital matters, but they by their own oscitancy, supine, and unreasonable lenity lost it themselves. For so the Gemara goes on.
Rabh Nachman bar Isaac saith, Let him not say that they did not judge judgments of Mulcts, for they did not judge capital judgments neither. And whence comes this? 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 When they saw that so many Murders and Homicides multiplied upon them, that they could not well judge and call them to account, they said it is better for us that we remove from place to place. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 For how can we otherwise [sitting here, and not punishing them] not contract a guilt upon ourselves?
They thought themselves obliged to punish Murderers whiles they sat in the room Gazith 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , for the place itself engaged them to it. They are the words of the Gemarists. Upon which the Gloss. The room Gazith was half of it within and half of it without the Holy place. The reason of which was, that it was requisite, that the Council should sit near the Divine Majesty. Hence it is that they say, whoever constitutes an unfit Judge, is as if he planted a Grove by the Altar of the Lord, as it is written, Judges and Officers shalt thou make thee: and it follows presently after, thou shalt not plant thee a Grove near the Altar of the Lord thy God, Deut. XVI. 18, 21. They removed therefore from Gazith, and sat in the Taberne: Now though the Taberne were upon the mountain of the Temple, yet they did not sit so near the Divine Majesty there, as they did when they sat in the room Gazith.
Let us now in order put the whole matter together.
I. The Sanhedrin were most stupidly and unreasonably remiss in their punishment of capital offenders, going upon this reason especially, that they accounted it so horrible a thing to sentence an Israelite to death. Forsooth, he is of the seed of Abraham, of the blood and stock of Israel, and you must have a care how you touch such an one!
R. Eliezer b. R. Simeon, had laid hold on some Thieves. R. Joshua b. Korchah sent to him, saying, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 O thou Vinegar, the Son of good Wine, [i. e. O thou wicked Son of a good Father] How long wilt thou deliver the people of God to the slaughter! He answered and said, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 I root the Thorns out of the Vineyard: to whom the other; Let the Lord of the Vineyard come and root them out himself. It is worth noting, that the very thieves of Israel, are the people of God, and O they must not be touched by any means, but referred to the judgment of God himself.
When R. Ishmael b. R. Jose was constituted a Magistrate by the King, there happened some such thing to him, for Elias himself rebuked him saying, how long wilt thou deliver over the people of God to slaughter! Hence that which we alleged elsewhere. The Sanhedrin that happens to sentence any one to death within the space of seven years, is called a destroyer. R. Eleazar ben Azariah saith, it is so, if they should but condemn one within seventy years.
II. It is obvious to any one how this foolish remissness, and letting loose the reins of judgment, would soon increase the numbers of Robbers, Murderers, and all kind of wickedness: and indeed they did so abundantly multiply, that the Sanhedrin neither could nor durst, as it ought, call the Criminals to account. The Laws slept whiles wickedness was in the height of its Revels, and punitive justice was so out of countenance, that as to uncertain murders they made no search, and certain ones, they framed no judgment against.
Since the time that Homicides multiplied, the beheading the Heifer ceased. And in the place before quoted in Avodah When they saw the numbers of Murderers so greatly increase, that they could not sit in judgment upon them, they said, let us remove, &c.
So in the case of Adultery, which we also observed in our Notes upon Chap. VIII. Since the time that Adultery so openly advanced, under the second Temple, they lest off trying the Adulteress, by the bitter water, &c.
So that we see the liberty of judging in capital matters was no more taken from the Jews by the Romans, than the beheading of the Heifer, or the trial of the suspected Wife by the bitter waters was taken away by them; which no one will affirm. But rather.
III. When the Sanhedrin saw that it was in vain to struggle against the mighty torrent and inundation of all manner of wickedness, that played Rex and encroached so fast upon them, and that the interposure of their authority could do nothing in suppressing them, they being uncapable of passing judgment as they ought, they determine not to sit in judgment at all: And whereas they thought themselves bound by the Majesty and awfulness of the place, while they sat in the Room Gazith [In the very Court of Israel before the Altar] to judge according to the sacredness of the place, but could not indeed do it, by reason of the daring pride and resolution of the Criminals, they threw themselves out of that apartment, and went further off into the place where the Exchangers shops were kept in the Court of the Gentiles, and so to other places which we find mentioned in Rosh hashanah.
IV. It is disputed whether they ever returned to their first place Gazith, or no. It is affirmed by the Gloss in Avodah Zarah When for a time they found it absolutely necessary, they betook themselves again to that room. We have the same also elsewhere upon this Tradition.
It is a Tradition of R. Chaia. From the day wherein the Temple was destroyed, though the Sanhedrin ceased, yet the four kinds of death [which were wont to be inflicted by the Sanhedrin] did not cease. For he that had deserved to be stoned to death, he either fell off from some house, or some wild Beast tore and devoured him. He that had deserved burning, he either fell into some fire, or some Serpent bit him. He that had deserved to be slain, [i. e. with the Sword] was either delivered into the hands of an heathen King, or was murdered by Robbers. He that had deserved strangling, was either drowned in some River, or choked by a squinancy.
But it may be objected, why is it said, From the time that the Temple was destroyed, and not, forty years before the destruction of the Temple? To this the Gloss answereth: Sometimes according to the urgency and necessity of the time, the Sanhedrin returned to the room Gazith, &c. It is further excepted 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 But they never returned to sit in capital causes, or to try Murders. For the reason of their removal at first was, because the numbers of Homicides so encreast upon them, &c.
V. When the great Council did not sit in Gazith, all Courts for capital matters ceased everywhere else. One Gloss saith thus: They took no cognizance of capital matters in any of the lesser Sessions, so long as the great Sanhedrin did not sit in the room Gazith. Another saith: What time the great Sanhedrin sat in its proper place, where it ought, near the Altar; then thou shalt make thee Judges in all thy Gates, to judge in capital causes: but when that removed, then all cognizance about those matters ceased.
VI. The Sanhedrin removed, as we have already seen, from Gazith, forty years before Jerusalem was destroyed: and this is the very thing that was said, forty years before the destruction of the City, judgment in capital causes was taken away from them. And now let the Reader judge, what should be the reason of their being deprived of this privilege; whether the Romans were in fault, or whether rather the Jews, nay the Sanhedrin itself had not brought it upon themselves. When the Sanhedrin flitted from Gazith, all judgment of this kind vanished; and upon what reasons they did thus flit, we have learnt from their own Pens.
We will not contend about the time when these forty years should first begin; though I am apt to think they might begin about half a year before Christ's death. The words which we have under consideration, spoken by the Sanhedrin to Pilate, seem to refer wholly to the reason we have already mentioned. It is not lawful for us to put any man to death. Why is it not lawful? Because being forced by the necessity of the times, we retired from the Room Gazith, where if we sit not, neither we ourselves nor any Court under us can take any cognizance of causes of life and death.
But what necessity of times could urge you to remove? So greatly did the Criminals multiply, and grew to such an head, that we neither could, nor durst animadvert upon them, according to what the Majesty of the place might expect and require from us, if we should sit in Gazith.
That must be observed from the Evangelists, that when they had had Christ in examination in the Palace of the High Priest all night, in the morning the whole Sanhedrin met, that they might pass Sentence of Death upon him. Where then was this that they met? Questionless in the Room Gazith, at least if they adhered to their own rules and constitutions; Thither they betook themselves sometimes upon urgent necessity. The Gloss before quoted excepts only the case of murder, which amongst all their false accusations they never charged Christ with.
But however, suppose it were granted, that the great Council met either in the Taberne, or some other place, (which yet by no means agreed with their own Tradition) did they deal truly, and as the matter really and indeed was, with Pilate when they tell him, it is not lawful for us to put any man to death? He had said to them, Take ye him, and judge him according to your Laws We have indeed Judged and Condemned him, but we cannot put any one to death. Was this that they said, in fact true? how came they then to stone the Protomartyr Stephen? How came they to stone Ben Sarda at Lydda ? How came they to burn the Priest's Daughter alive, that was taken in Adultery ?
It is probable they had not put any one to death as yet, since the time that they had removed out of Gazith, and so might the easilier persuade Pilate in that case: But their great design was to throw off the odium of Christ's death from themselves, at least amongst the vulgar crowd, fearing them, if the Council themselves should have decreed his Execution, They seek this evasion therefore which did not altogether want some color and pretext of truth: and it succeeded according to what they did desire, Divine Providence so ordering it, as the Evangelist intimates, verse. 32. That the saying of Jesus might be fulfilled, which he slake signifying what death he should die. That is, be Crucified according to the custom of the Romans.
Whiles I am upon this thought, I cannot but reflect upon that passage, than which nothing is more worthy observation, in the whole description of the Roman Beast in the Revelations, Chap. XIII. 4. The Dragon which gave power to the Beast. We cannot say this of the Assyrian, Babylonish, or any other Monarchy, for the Holy Scriptures do not say it. But reason dictates, and the event itself tells us that there was something acted by the Roman Empire in behalf of the Dragon, which was not compatible with any other, that is, the putting of the Son of God to death. Which thing we must remember, as often as we recite that Article of our Creed, He suffered under Pontius Pilate, that is, was put to death by the Roman Empire.
VERS. XXXVII.
CHRIST had said, For this end came I into the world, that I might bear witness to the truth. q. d. I will not deny but that I am a King, as thou hast said, for, for this end I came that I might bear witness to the truth, whatever hazards I should run upon that account. Upon this Pilate asks him, what is Truth? that is, what is the true state of this affair? That thou who art so poor a wretch shouldst call thyself a King, and at the same time that thou callest thyself a King, yet sayest thy Kingdom is not of this world. Where lies the true sense and meaning of this riddle?
But supposing when Christ said he came that he might bear witness to the truth, he meant in general, the Gospel: then Pilate asks him, what is that truth? However, the Evangelist mentions nothing, either whether our Savior gave him any answer to that question, or whether indeed Pilate stayed in expectation of any answer from him.
CHAP. XIX.
VERS. II.
AMost unquestionable token this, that Christ's Kingdom was not of this world, when he was crowned only with Thorns and Briars, which were the curse of this Earth, Gen. III. 18. Herod had put upon him a purple Robe, Luke XXIII. 11. and the Soldiers added this Crown. It is likewise said that they also clothed him with this Robe, that is, after he had been stripped, in order to be scourged.
VERS. XIII.
WHAT is it could be objected against it, should we say that the Evangelist by this title of the Pavement, should mean the room Gazith where the Sanhedrin sat? And that when the Jews would not go into Pilate's Judgment-Hall, he would himself go into theirs?
Aristeas tells us concerning the Temple, that it looked toward the East, the back parts of it towards the West, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , but the floor was all paved with stone. To this the Talmudists all witness, and to the pavement, especially, Josephus by a memorable story: One Julian a Centurion in Titus his Army, pursuing and killing the Jews, with infinite hardness and strength, in the very Court of the Temple, having many and very sharp nails fastened to the bottom of his shoes, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , as every other Soldier had; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , and running along upon the pavement his heels tripped up and he fell backward, &c.
But had not the room Gazith a Pavement laid in a more than ordinary manner? whence else had it its name? It is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the room Gazith, saith Aruch, because it was paved with smooth square stone. Were not all the other places so too?
They distinguish between 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that is, Bricks, and half Bricks, squared hewn stones, and rough or unhewn. Now therefore when there were so many apartments about the Courts, were those all paved with rough Stone or Bricks, and this only of square and hewn Stone? without doubt, the whole building was much more uniform; And then we shall hardly find out anymore probable reason why this place was particularly and above all other Rooms, called Gazith, but, that it was laid with a more noble and rich pavement than all the rest. And therefore what should forbid, that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the pavement in this place should not be meant of the room Gazith?
Object. But Gazith was in the Holy place, and it was not lawful for Pilate being a Gentile, to enter there.
Sol. I. If he would do it per fas & nefas, who could hinder him?
II. It is a question whether he could not sit in that Room, and yet be within the bounds of the Court of the Gentiles, into which it was lawful for a Gentile to enter. Half of that Room indeed was within the Court of Israel, but there, the Fathers of the Council themselves did not sit, because it was lawful for none to sit in that Court but the King only: The other half part in which they sat, was in Chel, and extended itself, as it should seem, into the Court of the Gentiles. For if 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 was but ten cubits breadth within the Walls it would be much too narrow a room, for seventy men to sit in, if the Gazith did not extend itself a little within the Court of the Gentiles.
The Syriac renders it by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 a mound, or fence: which may fall in with what we have said. For 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Chel, in which was part of this Room, was the fence to all the Courts, excepting the Court of the Gentiles.
But let us see whether 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is Hebrew for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or no. That 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Gab, amongst other things signifies a surface, doth not stand in need of much proof: and so the pavement and surface of the floor are convertible. And as that Room might be peculiarly called Gazith in the ancient Jewish language, upon the account of its pavement; so might it in their more modern language be called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 for the same reason. What if that in Jerusalem Sanhedrin 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 should be rendered, the Elders that sit in the upper Gab in the mount of the Temple? But we will not contend.
VERS. XIV.
THE preparation of the Passover; that is, of the Chagigah, as we have already noted at Chap. XVIII. 28. and more largely at Mark XIV. 12. where also we took notice of the following passage: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 About the tenth hour.
VERS. XX.
THAT is, in the Chaldee Tongue, or the Language of those Jews on the other side Euphrates, as before at Chap. V.
VERS. XXII.
THIS was a common way of speaking amongst the Rabbins. A Widow if she take, or occupy the moveables of her Husband deceased, for her own maintenance, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 What she takes she takes, i. e. that which she hath done, stands good, and the moveables go to her.
If any one shall say, I bind myself to offer an oblation out of the Frying-pan, and offers indeed something from a Gridiron, and so on the contrary; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that which he hath offered, he hath offered. That is, (and indeed it is frequently used amongst them) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that which is done, and cannot be recalled.
If the putting off the shoe of the Husbands Brother be before the spitting in his face, or the spitting in his face, before the putting off the shoe, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that which is done, and it stands good.
Pilate doth almost act the Prophet as well as Caiaphas. That which I have written [JESUS OF NAZARETH THE KING OF THE JEWS] I have written, and it shall stand and obtain, they shall have no other King Messiah than this forever.
VERS. XXIII.
BY the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Garments, we are to understand all his Cloths, excepting his Coat, or upper Garment, for which, because it was without seam, they cast lots.
Targumist upon Psal. XXII. 18. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 They cast lots upon my Sindon, or linen. For 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 with him is Sindon, or Linnen, Prov. XXXI. 24. That is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Sindon, as it is the same with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Talith, The upper Coat.
Matth. V. 40. He that will take thy 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , thy Coat, or outward garment, let him also have thy 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , inward garment also.
VERS. XXV.
〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 He stood under the Cross [or the Gallows] and wept. It is told of R. Eliezer ben R. Simeon, who being very angry had commanded a Fuller to be hanged 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 but his wrath abating, and he coming to himself, went after him to have freed him, but could not, for they had hanged the man before he came. He therefore repeated that passage, He that keepeth his lips and his tongue, keepeth his soul from trouble. He stood under the Gallows and wept, &c.
That is, Mary the Wife of Cleophas, or Alpheus. For,
I. Consult Mark XV. 40. There were also Women looking on afar off, among whom was, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the Mother of James the less, and Joses. Now it is well enough known that Alpheus was the Father of James the less and of Joses, Matth. X. 3.
II. We very oftentimes meet with the name 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 amongst the Talmudists, which in the reading may be turned either into Alphai, or Cleophi. R. Berechiah 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 R. Chaijah and R. Achah say 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . R. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 asked R. Johanan. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
VERS. XXVI.
I. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Widow is maintained by the goods of the heirs [of him that is deceased] so long as she remain a Widow, till she receive her dower.
II. Joseph being deceased, and Jesus now dying, there were no heirs, and probably no Goods or Estate, for the support and maintenance of his Mother Mary: This Christ at his last breath takes particular care of; and probably had made provision before; for it is hardly conceivable, that this was the first overture he had with St. John in this affair, but that had obtained a promise from him in his Mother's behalf some time before this. And hence perhaps that peculiar love he bore to him beyond all the rest. So that those words, Woman behold thy Son, and on the other side to him, behold thy Mother, seem no other than as if he had said, This man, from the time that thou art now deprived of thy Son, shall be in the stead of a Son to thee, and shall cherish and provide for thee; and so vice versâ to his Disciple John.
VERS. XXIX.
BUT was not this an unusual and uncustomary thing, that there should be a Vessel filled with Vinegar? should it not have been rather 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 with Myrrhate Wine, or Wine mingled with Myrrh? as it is Mark XV. 23.
It seems evident from the other Evangelists, that our Savior had the proffer of something to drink, at two several times.
I. Before he was nailed to the Cross, Matth. XXVII. 33, 34. When they were come to a place called Golgotha,—they gave him Vinegar to drink, mingled with gall, —Vers. 35. And they Crucified him. It was the custom toward those that were condemned by the Sanhedrin; they were wont to allow them a Cup, but it was of Wine mingled with Myrrh or Frankinsence, that by drinking that, their brains might intoxicate, and themselves become the more insensible of their torments, and less apprehensive of their death.
When any one was leading out to Execution, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 they give them to drink a little Fankinsence in a cup of Wine. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Mark XV. 23. And they gave it for this reason, as it immediately follows 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 viz. that their understanding might be disordered. It was a Narcotick draugt on purpose to disguise and stupefy the senses.
Wine mingled with Myrrh, saith Mark. Vinegar mingled with Gall, saith Matthew. Perhaps both these were administered, for it follows in the place above quoted. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Women of quality in Jerusalem, were wont to bring them this cup of their own accord. And no doubt there were Women in Jerusalem enough, that would not be wanting in this good office toward Jesus. But he, saith St. Mark, would not receive it. After this, it is probable, the Soldiers or some of the Jews might in scorn and derision offer him a draught of Vinegar and Gall, of which he also refused to drink. But be it so, that there was but one cup given him and that of Vinegar mingled with Gall, yet we have observed in our Notes upon Matth. XXVII. 34. how easily these two Evangelists may be reconciled.
II. As to those that were condemned by the Sanhedrin, there was no need that they should have any other drink, than the entoxicating Wine, for they were quickly dead, and felt no thirst. But the Cross kept the wretch a long time in exquisite torment, and those torments provoked a mighty thirst. So that perhaps there might be a Vessel full either of water, or something else that was drinkable, placed near the Cross, by which he that was Crucified might allay his thirst as need should require. Whether this Vinegar might be according to the custom of the Romans, or whether only offered at this time in sport and mockery, I will make no enquiry at present. Christ knew before hand that Vinegar would be given him when he should say, I thirst, and therefore did he on purpose say I thirst, that Vinegar might be given him and the prophesy fulfilled.
〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The sponge which sucks up the drink. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The sponge that drinks up any moisture that is unclean, though it be dry on the outside, yet if it fall into a Furnace it defileth it.
Matth. XXVII. 48. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , put it on a reed. So also St. Mark.
I. If 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signify Hyssop, as the nearness of sound might persuade us it doth, then there are several kinds of it. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Whatever Hyssop hath an adjunct, or an Epithet, is not fit; that is, to sprinkle the unclean. For there was, as it follows afterward 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Grecian Hyssop. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Fucous Hyssop, perhaps of the color of black Lead. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Roman Hyssop. And 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Wild Hyssop.
II. Now that there was a sort of Hyssop that grew into stalks like Canes or Reeds is evident from that which immediately follows in the next halach, where it is thus distinguished 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 He gathers Hyssop, for food, and he gathered it for wood. Partly also from Succah , where amongst the mention that is made of Canes and Reeds, and Twigs wherewith they were wont to cover the Booths they made at the Feast of Tabernacles, this 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hyssop is reckoned up for one.
VERS. XXXI.
THAT Sabbath-day was an high day: Because, 1. It was the Sabbath. 2. It was the day where all the people presented themselves in the Temple according to that command in Exod. XXIII. 17. 3. That was the day when the sheaf of the first-fruits was offered according to that command, Levite. XXIII. 10, 11.
I. On the fifteenth day of the Month was an holy-day, the first day of the Feast, wherein they made ready their Chagigah, with which they feasted together for joy of the Feast. That is worth our noting, Every day they swept the ashes off the Altar at the time of cockcrowing, only on the day of expiation they did it at midnight, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and on the three feasts they did it after the first watch. A little after, In the three Feasts when infinite numbers of Israelites assembled, and numberless sacrifices were offered, they swept the ashes off the Altar, just after the first watch; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 for by cock-crowing the Court was crowded with Israelites. I do not scruple here to render 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 by cock-crowing, although in the very place alleged it is under controversy whether it signify the cock-crowing, or the Proclamation of the Sagan, or ruler of the Temple, viz. that Proclamation mentioned , The Sagan saith unto them go and see whether the time for slaying the sacrifices be at hand; if it were time, then he that was sent out to see, returned with this answer, the day begins to break, &c.
If the phrase 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 be to be taken in this sense, then however we see that the people were assembled together before morning-light; and yet I do not doubt but it ought to be rendered the cock-crowing, which might be made clear by many good proofs, if there were place or leisure for it. Now the people's assembling in the Court thus soon in the morning on these Feast-days, was upon this account, because on the first day of the Feast innumerable Peace-offerings [ 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ] were to be made, which were the Chagigah, and on the second day as many burnt-offerings for the appearance of the people before the Lord.
It is true indeed the victims were not slain before the morning-light, but we may very well suppose that before they could be slain, they must be searched and examined by the Mumcheh, or any that were deputed to that office, to see whether the beasts allotted for sacrifice, were without blemish, and fit for the Altar yea or no. And upon this account they assembled, and the sacrifices were brought into the Court so early in the morning. And now let us call a little to mind Annas the Sagan, or ruler of the Temple; might not he also be in the Temple, very early in the morning? Did not his charge require it, to see that all things might be provided, and put into a readiness for the service of that day? Let us consider what hath been newly quoted, The Sagan or Ruler saith, Go and see if the time for killing the Sacrifices be come; i. e. whether day-light appear or no: And from hence it may be we may gather the reason why Annas was not amongst the rest in Caiaphas his Palace, and why they brought our Savior before him first, viz. because his affairs in the Temple would not permit him to sit at that time with the Sanhedrin, and yet they had a mind Christ should be carried before him, before he himself should be called away into the Temple for the necessary discharge of his office there.
At the due time the Sacrifices appointed for the Chagigah were slain; those parts of them that pertain'd to the Altar or to the Priest, were given to them; the rest of the beast was shar'd amongst the owners that had offered it, and from thence proceeded their Feastings together, and their great mirth and rejoicings according to the manner of that Festival.
This was the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , ver. 14. The preparation of the Passover; and that was the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the Passover, to which the Elders of the Council reserving themselves, would by no means enter into the Judgment-hall, Chap. XVIII. 28.
II. That day drawing toward night, those that were deputed by the Sanhedrin to reap the sheaf of the first-fruits went out ▪ Those that were deputed by the Sanhedrin to reap went forth 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the evening of the Feast-day [the first day of the Feast] and bound their corn in sheafs pretty near the ground, that the reaping might be the easier. All the neighbouring Towns about gathered together, that it might be done with the greater pomp. When it grew duskish, he that was about to reap, said, The Sun is set; and they answered, Well. The Sun is set; and they answered, Well. With this Sickle; Well. With this Sickle; Well. In this Basket; Well. In this Basket; Well. And if it happened to be on the Sabbath-day, he said, On this Sabbath; and they answered, Well. On this Sabbath; Well. I will reap, and they said, reap. I will reap; reap. And so as he said these things thrice over, they answered thrice to everyone of them, Well, well, well. And all this upon the account of the Baithusians, who said, the sheaf of the first-fruits ought not to be reaped on the close of the Feast-day.
About that hour of the day wherein our Savior was buried, they went forth to this reaping, and when the Sabbath was now come they began the work, for the Sabbath itself did not hinder this work.
R. Ananias the Sagan of the Priests saith, on the Sabbath-day they reap'd the sheaf only to the measure of one Seah, with one Sickle, in one Basket; but upon a common day they reaped three Seahs, with three Sickles, in three Baskets. But the wise men say, The Sabbath-days, and other days as to this matter are alike.
III. This night they were to lodge in Jerusalem, or in Booths about, so near the City that they might not exceed the bounds of a Sabbath-days journey.
In the morning again they met very early in the Court as the day before, the Sacrifices are brought for the people's appearing before the Lord; the sheaf of first-fruits is offered in its turn, the rites and usages of which offering are described in the place above quoted. So that upon this high day there happened to be three great Solemnities in one, viz. the Sabbath, the sheaf-offering, and the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the appearing of the people in the Court before the Lord, according to the command, Exod. XXIII. 17.
VERS. XXXIV.
THE Arab. Vers. of the Erpenian Edition, adds the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , he pierced his right side, afraid (as it should seem) lest the miracle should not be great enough if the blood and water should have been supposed to have issued from his left-side, because of the water that is said to be contained in the Pericardium; which being pierced, it is conceived blood and water could not but upon natural reasons flow out of it. But this issue of blood and water had something of mystery in it beyond nature; if nothing preternatural had been in it, I hardly imagine the Evangelist would have used that threefold asseveration concerning the truth of the thing▪ as we see he doth. And he that saw it bare record, &c.
It is commonly said that the two Sacraments of the New Testament, Water and Blood flowed out of this wound; but I would rather say that the Antitype of the Old Testament might be here seen.
I. The Apostle teacheth us that the ratification of the old Covenant was by Blood and Water, Heb. IX. 19. Moses took the blood of calves and of goats with water, &c. I confess indeed that Moses makes no mention of water, Exod. XXIV. but the Apostle writing to the Hebrews does not write without such authority as they could not tell how to gainsay. And if my memory do not fail me, I think I have read some where among some of the Jewish Authors (but the place its self is unhappily slipped from me) that when there was some pause to be made betwixt the slaying of the Sacrifice, and the sprinkling of the blood upon the Altar (such a kind of pause as Moses made when he read to the people the articles of their Covenant) they mingled water with the blood, lest it should congeal and coagulate. However the authority is sufficient that the Apostle tells us that the first Testament was dedicated by Blood and Water. The Antitype of which is clearly exhibited in this ratification of the New Testament; and hence is it that the Evangelist by so vehement asseverations confirms the truth of this passage, because it so plainly answers the Type, and gives such assurance of the fulfilling of it.
II. I must not by any means let pass that in Shemoth rabba , He smote the rock, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and the waters gushed out, Psal. LXXVIII. 20. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 But the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifies nothing else but blood, as it is said 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the woman that hath an issue of blood upon her, Levite. XV. 20. Moses therefore smote the rock twice, and first it gusht out blood, then water.
The rock was Christ, 1 Cor. X. 4. Compare these two together, Moses smote the rock, and blood and water, saith the Jew, flowed out thence. The Soldier pierced our Savior's side with a Spear, and water and blood, saith the Evangelist, flowed thence.
St. John concludes this asseveration of his, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , that ye might believe. It is not without moment what is commonly said, viz. that by this flowing out of water and blood, it is evident his Pericardium was pierced, and so there was an undoubted assurance given of his death; but I hardly believe the Evangelist in this clause had any direct eye toward it; would he be so vehement in asserting he that saw bare record, and he knoweth that he saith true, that ye may believe that Jesus was indeed dead? surely there was no need of such mighty asseverations for that; questionless therefore he would intimate something else, viz. that you may believe that this is the true blood of the New Covenant, which so directly answers the Type in the confirmation of the old. Nor do I think that the water itself which issu'd from his side, was that only which was contained in the Pericardium, but that something supernatural was in this matter.
VERS. XXXVI.
THESE words may have some reference to that of Psal. XXXIV. 20. but they are more commonly refer'd by Expositors to that Law about the Paschal Lamb, Exod. XII. 46. For Christ is our Passover, 1 Cor. V. 7.
If any one break a bone of the Passover, let him receive forty stripes. The bones, the sinews, and what remains of the flesh, must be all burnt on the sixteenth day. If the sixteenth day should happen on the Sabbath [and so indeed it did happen in this year wherein Christ was crucified] then let them be burned on the seventeenth; for they drive away neither the Sabbath, nor any holy day.
VERS. XXXVII.
IT is observed by all Expositors how the Greek Version in that place of Zacharias, from whence this passage is taken doth vary; for they have it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . They shall look toward me, because they have insulted. So the Roman Edition, and so some others.
It is questioned whether those Interpreters did so render the words, or whether this were not an interpolation. To pass by the testimonies of the ancients that ascribe it to the Seventy. Let us observe these two things.
I. It is no unusual thing for the Greek Interpreters in their renderings, sometimes to favor the Jewish Traditions, and sometimes the common Interpretation of the Nation; there want not instances of both kinds, it is the latter we have to do with at this time; wherein take one or two examples, instead of many that might be reckoned up.
What reason can be given that they should render Caphtorim, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Cappadocians, and Caphtor, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Cappadocia, Deut. II. 23. but only because the Pelusiotes, and Pelusium were commonly so termed by the Jews? Who could have imagined any reason why they should say of Eli, that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 He judged Israel twenty years, when in the original it is forty, 1 Sam. IV. 18. but that they favor'd the common sigment of that Nation, that the Philistines had such a dread of Samson, that for twenty years after his death they stood in as much awe of him as if he was then alive and judged Israel. Of this nature is their rendering 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Son by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , instruction, Psal. II. 12. and upon some such account no doubt is this 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the place we are now treating of. For,
II. The Chaldee Paraphrast thus renders the words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Rogabunt a facie mea, quoniam translati sunt. They shall ask after me, because they are carried away. Which R. Sol. thus interprets, They shall look back to mourn▪ because the Gentiles have pierced some of them, and killed them in their captivity. Which agrees so well with the sense of the Greek Version, They shall look on me [mourning] because the Gentiles have insulted over my people in their captivity; that I cannot suspect any interpolation in the Greek Copies; but rather think that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 was the very word which the Interpreters themselves did use, which rendering our Evangelist deservedly rejects.
Think you that figment about Messiah ben Joseph (to which the Talmudists apply these words of Zacharias, as also doth Ibn Ezra upon the place) was invented when the Greek Version was first framed? if not, which is my opinion, then it is probable that the Chakle • Paraphrast gave the sense that most obtained in the Nation at that time, with which that of the Greek accords well enough. The Interpreters rendering it according to the common opinion of the Nation, read as it seems, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , for it is a thing not unusual with them to be purblind either in earnest, or through trifling; on purpose, or through meet dim sightedness. Nor is it any wonder that our Evangelist should depart from their reading, when they depart from the Text itself, which the Jews retain against their own Comments upon it. They keep the word, but pervert the sense, especially Kimchi upon the place. The Targumist something more modestly than either he or the Talmudic Authors; but far enough from the mind of the Prophet, although not from the mind and opinion of the Nation in common upon that Prophesy; which opinion you will easily suppose the Greek Interpreter had an eye to, at least if you will admit R. Solomon as an Expositor upon them.
CHAP. XX.
VERS. I.
AND David smote them, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 1 Sam. XXX. 17. Seventy, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , from the morning to the evening, and on the morrow. Vulg. A vespera usque ad vesperam alterius diei, from the evening to the evening of the next day. But the Rabbins , What is the meaning of? 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Two nights and one day. Kimchi. From the evening of this day to the evening of the next, and all that evening to the twilight of the following day.
Reckon the time from the laying of Christ in the grave to his Resurrection, and the measures of both the times will agree: Compare also the things themselves. In that space of time David conquered the Amalekites, in the same space of time our Savior overcame Death, Hell and Satan.
VERS. V.
STanding within the Cave he bowed himself to look down into 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the place where the body was laid, which was four cubits lower than the flower of the Cave itself. See Bava bathra about places of burial , which place I have quoted and explained▪ Centur. Chorograph. cap. ult.
VERS. XII.
SO were the Cherubims placed at each end of the Mercy-seat, Exod. XXV. 18, 19. As to those Cherubims that were in Solomon's Temple, 2 Chron. III. 10. I cannot but by the way observe what I meet with in Bava bathra Onkelos the Proselyte saith, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Cherubims are like children going from their master. That is, with their faces turned partly toward their Master, and partly toward the way wherein they were to go. For as the Gemarists, When Israel obeyed the will of God, the Cherubims looked toward one another, but when they did not, then they turned their faces toward the walls.
Thus Onkelos comments upon this place of the Chronicles, I hardly think he Targumizeth on the Book; for the Targum, at least that is in our hands, renders it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 both the Cherubims are made of lilly-work.
VERS. XVII.
THESE words relate to what he had spoken formerly about sending the Comforter, and that he would not leave them comfortless, &c. And this probably Mary Magdalene's mind was intent upon when she fell at his feet, and would have embraced them. But he,
VERS. XXIII.
HE had formerly given them a power of binding and loosing, and therefore probably bestows something more upon them now than what he had confer'd before. For,
I. It would seem a little incongruous for our Savior to use an action so new and unwonted, such as was his breathing upon them, to vest them only with that power which he had before given them.
II. The power of binding and loosing was concerned only in the articles and decisions of the Law; this power which he now gives them reached to the sins of mankind. That power concerned the Doctrines, this the persons of men.
Now that we may understand the words that are before us, let us a little consider what is said, Luk. XXIV. 46. Thus it is written, and thus it behooved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day. And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all Nations, beginning at Jerusalem. Which words we may suppose he spoke before he uttered what is in this verse. And so might there not upon the occasion of those words arise some such scruple as this in the Apostles breasts? Is it so indeed must remission of sins be Preached to those in Jerusalem, who have stained themselves with the blood of the Messiah himself? Yes, saith he, For whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them. To this those words of his upon the Cross have some reference, Luk. XXIII. 34. Father forgive them, &c. And indeed upon what foundation, with what confidence could the Apostles have preached remission of sins to such wretched men who had so wickedly, so cruelly murdered their own Lord, the Lord of life, unless authorized to it by a peculiar commission granted to them from their Lord himself!
Besides the negative included in these words, that is, If you do not remit them, they shall not be remitted, there is something superadded that is positive. That is,
I. There is granted to them a power of smiting the rebellious with present death, or some bodily stroke.
II. A power of delivering them over to Satan. Whence had St. Peter that power of striking Ananias and Sapphira with so fatal a bolt? whence St. Paul that of striking Elymas blind? whence of delivering over Hymenaeus and Alexander to Satan, if not from this very commission given them by Christ? Christ himself never exercised this power himself; it was not one person, whom he stroke either with death, or any afflictive disease; some indeed he raised when they had been dead, and infinite numbers of the sick and diseased, whom he cured: He snatched several from the power of the Devils, he delivered none to them. That the Apostles therefore might be capable of performing things of so high a nature, it was necessary they should be backed and encouraged by a peculiar authority; which if we find not in this clause, Whose soever sins ye retain they are retained, where should we look for it? And therefore when he endows his Apostles with a power which he never thought fit to exercise in his own person, no wonder if he does it by a singular and unusual action, and that was breathing upon them, ver. 22.
But we must know that whereas amongst other mighty powers confer'd, we reckon that as one, viz. delivering over unto Satan, we are far from meaning nothing else by it but Excommunication. What the Jews themselves meant by that kind of phrase, let us see by one instance.
〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Those two men of Cush that stood before Solomon, Elihoreph, and Ahijah the Scribes, Sons of Shausha. On a certain day Solomon saw the Angel of Death weeping; he said, why weepest thou? He answered, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Because these two Cushites entreat me that they may continue here. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Solomon delivered them over to the Devil, who brought them to the borders of Luz, and when they were come to the borders of Luz, they died.
Gloss. He calls them Cushites [Ironically] because they were very beautiful. They entreat me that they might continue here. For the time of their death was now come: But the Angel of death could not take their souls away, because it had been decreed that they should not die but at the Gates of Luz. Solomon therefore delivered them over 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to the Devils; for he reigned over the Devils, as it is written, And Solomon sat upon the Throne of the Lord, for he reigned 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 over those things that are above, and those things that are below.
Josephus also makes mention of the power that Solomon had over Devils. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . God taught him an art against Demons. The belief of either of these stories is at the liberty of the Reader. Only from the former we may make this observation, that a power of delivering over to Satan, was even in the Jews opinion divine and miraculous. We acknowledge this to have been in the Apostles, and in the Apostles only; and I know nowhere if not in the words we are now treating of from whence otherwise the original of this power and authority can be derived.
III. It seems further, that at this very time was granted to the Apostles a commission to confer the Holy Spirit on those whom they found qualified, and that in these words, Receive ye the Holy Ghost. i. e. Receive ye it, to distribute it to others. For although it cannot be denied but that they received the Holy Ghost for other reasons also, and to other ends, of which we have already discoursed; yet is not this great end to be excluded, which seemed the highest and noblest endowment of all, viz. that Christ breathing upon them, inspired them with the Holy Ghost, with this mighty authority and privilege, that they should be capable of dispensing it to others also.
VERS. XXIV.
I. THE Evangelist does not here, as the writers of Lexicons render the signification of an Hebrew name into Greek, when he tells us that Thomas is also called Didymus, but only lets us know that as he was called Thomas among the Hebrews, so was he called Didymus among the Greeks. There is not another amongst the Twelve Apostles of whom this is said. Simon indeed is called Peter, but these are really two distinct names; so was Nathanael called Bartholomew; but Thomas and Didymus both one name, of one signification in different languages. Perhaps Thomas was born in some place where the Jews and the Greeks promiscuously inhabited, such a place was the region of Decapolis, and so by the Hebrews he might be called by his Hebrew name, and the Greek by the Greeks.
II. The Disciples had all fled and were dispersed when Christ was apprehended, Mark XIV. 50. except Peter and John; whence it is said in ver. 2. of this Chapter that Mary Magdalene came to Peter, and that other Disciple whom Jesus loved; for she knew where she might find them, and so she could not for the rest. And thus scattered, as it should seem, they past over the Sabbath-day, but when they heard that their Lord was risen, then they begin to associate again. But as yet Thomas had not got amongst them, and indeed Peter himself had been absent too, but that having seen the Lord he returned from Emmaus.
III. Thomas therefore not being present when our Savior breathed on the rest, and gave them the Holy Ghost, are we to suppose that he by his absence was deprived of this gift and privilege? No surely, for it was a privilege common to the whole Apostolate, and peculiar to them as so; so that however by his absence he might have mist of it, yet by reason of his Apostolacy he could not. St. Paul distant with a witness, while these things happened, both from the Apostleship and Religion too, yet when made an Apostle, was withal adorned with this privilege.
VERS. XXV.
THEY judge Moses once to have been thus weak and wavering in his faith , When the Holy Blessed God said to Moses, Go down for the people have corrupted themselves, he took the Tables and would not believe that Israel had sinned, saying, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 If I do not see, I will not believe.
Thou Racha, wouldst thou not have believed if thou hadst not seen?
VERS. XXVI.
I Would not easily believe that the intention of the Evangelist in this place was to let us know that Christ penetrated the doors with his body, but rather that the doors were shut for fear of the Jews, as v. 19. which he also reiterates in this verse, that he might let us know the Disciples were still at Jerusalem, where their greatest danger lay. On the morrow probably they were to make toward Galilee.
VERS. XXIX.
R. Simeon ben Lachish saith , the proselyte is more beloved by the Holy Blessed God than that whole crowd that stood before Mount Sinai; for unless they had heard the thunderings, and seen the flames and lightnings, the hills trembling, and the trumpets sounding, they had not received the Law. But the proselyte hath seen nothing of all this, and yet hath come in, devoting himself to the Holy Blessed God, and hath taken upon him the Kingdom of Heaven.
CHAP. XXI.
VERS. II.
HERE are seven of the Disciples mentioned, and but five of them named; those two whose names are not recited, probably were Philip and Andrew, as the four that were absent at that time might be the Sons of Alpheus, Matthew, Judas, Simeon and James. Compare those that are mentioned, Chap. I. and you may reasonably suppose the person not named there, ver. 37, 40. might be Thomas.
VERS. III.
CHRIST had ordered his Apostles to meet him at a mountain in Galilee, Mat. XXVIII. 16. It is plain, ver. 14. that he had not yet appeared to them there; so that it is something strange how they durst keep away from that mountain, and how the four newly mentioned durst be absent from the rest u • their number. They knew the mountain without doubt, and if they knew not the time wherein Christ would make his appearance amongst them, why should they not abide continually there in attendance for him?
It should seem that they did not look for him till the Lord's-day, which had not yet been since they were come into Galilee; and perhaps the Sons of Alpheus had in their return from Jerusalem betaken themselves amongst their relations▪ determining to be at that mountain on the Lord's day. These seven dwelt not far off the mountain which was near Capernaum, and hard by the Sea of Galilee; only Nathanael who dwelt more remote in Cana, toward the extreme North parts of that Sea. He was not yet gone home, but waiting the appointed time staid here. Peter and Andrew dwelt in Capernaum, and so probably did James and John; Philip in Bethsaida, and Thomas (as we may conjecture from his Greek name Didymus ) probably lived amongst the Syro-grecians in Gedara, or Hippo, or some place in that Country of Decapolis, not very far from Gennesareth.
VERS. V.
BY what word soever Christ expressed this Children to them, whether 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 as the Syr. or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 : it seems to be a very familiar and gentle compellation, that his Disciples from that very salutation of his might discern him. They did not know him by sight as appears ver. 4. he would have them know him therefore by the title he gave them.
〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which is very usual amongst the Rabbins, may not unfitly be rendered 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , i. e. Meat for one single repast. As if Christ should have said, Children, have ye any meat with you sufficient for a break-fast, or a dinner? But if 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 should signify any sort of meat that must be eaten with bread, as Camerarius thinks, then Christ's words seem to have this meaning: Here, I have bread with me, have you taken anything that we may eat this bread? and so 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 meat may be distinguished from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 bread.
VERS. XV.
WHY more than these? might it not have been enough to have said, as well as these? For, what reason had he to expect that Peter should love him more than the rest did? especially more than St. John, whom Christ himself had so loved, and who had stuck so close to him?
Christ seems therefore to reflect upon Peter 's late confidence, not without some kind of severity and reproof. q. d.
If there be anything in that threefold repetition feed, feed, feed, we may most fitly apply it to the threefold object of St. Peters Ministry, viz. the Gentiles, the Jews, and the Israelites of the ten Tribes.
I. To him were committed by his Lord the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, Matth. XVI. that he might open the door of Faith and the Gospel to the Gentiles, which he did in his preaching it to Cornelius:
II. In sharing out the work of Preaching the Gospel, amongst the three Ministers of of the Circumcision, his lot fell amongst the Jews in Babylon. James his lot was amongst the Jews in Palestine and Syria: And John 's amongst the Hellenists in Asia.
III. Now amongst the Jews in Babylon, were mixed the Israelites of the ten Tribes, and to them did the Gospel come, by the ministry of St. Peter, as I have shewn more at large in another Trearise.
To this therefore have the words of our Savior a plain reference; namely, putting Peter in mind, that whereas he had with so much confidence and assurance of himself, made such professions of love and constancy beyond the other Disciples, pretending to a wonderful resolution of laying down his very life in that behalf, that he would now show his zeal and courage in feeding the sheep of Christ. Thou canst not, Simon, lay down thy life for me, as thou didst once promise, for I have myself laid down my own life, and taken it up again: Feed thou my sheep therefore, and be ready to lay down thy life for them, when it shall come to be required of thee.
So that what is here said does not so much point out Peter 's Primacy as his danger; nor so much the privilege, as the bond of his Office, and his Martyrdom. At last, for, that our Savior had this meaning with him is plain, because immediately after this he tells him by what death he should glorify God, verse. 18.
VERS. XXII.
TILL I come, that is, till I come to destroy the City and Nation of the Jews. As to this kind of phrase, take a few instances.
Our Savior saith, Matth. XVI. 28. There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of Man coming in his Kingdom. Which must not be understood of his coming to the Last Judgment; for there was not one standing there that could live till that time: nor ought it to be understood of the Resurrection, as some would have it, for probably not only some, but in a manner all that stood there, lived till that time. His coming therefore, in this place, must be understood of his coming to take vengeance against those enemies of his, which would not have him to rule over them, Luke XIX. 12, 27.
Perhaps it will nor repent him that reads the Holy Scriptures, to observe these few things:
I. That the destruction of Jerusalem and the whole Jewish state, is described, as if the whole frame of this world were to be dissolved. Nor is it strange, when God destroyed his Habitation and City, places once so dear to him, with so direful and sad an overthrow; his own people whom he accounted of as much or more than the whole world beside, by so dreadful and amazing Plagues, Matth. XXIV. 29, 30. The Sun shall be darkened, &c. Then shall appear the sign of the Son of Man, &c. which yet are said to fall out, within that Generation, verse. 34. 2 Pet. III. 10. The Heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the Elements shall melt with fervent heat, &c. Compare with this, Deut. XXXII. 22. Heb. XII. 26. and observe, that by Elements, are understood the Mosaic Elements, Gal. IV. 9. Coloss. II. 20. and you will not doubt, that St. Peter speaks only of the Conflagration of Jerusalem, the destruction of the Nation, and the abolishing the dispensation of Moses.
Revel. VI. 12, 13. The Sun became black as sackcloth of hair, &c. and the Heavens departed as a scroll when it is rolled together, &c. Where, if we take notice of the foregoing Plagues, by which, according to the most frequent threatenings, he destroyed that people, viz. the Sword, verse. 4. Famine, verse. 5, 6. and the Plague, verse. 8. Withal comparing those words, They say to the Mountains fall on us and cover us, with Luke XXIII. 30. it will sufficiently appear, that by those phrases is understood the dreadful judgment and overthrow of that Nation, and City. With these also agrees that of Jerem. IV. from verse. 22. to 28. and clearly enough explains this phrase. To this appertain those and other such expressions as we meet with, 1 Cor. X. 11. On us the ends of the world are come: and 1 Pet. IV. 7. The end of all things is at hand.
II. With reference to this, and under this notion, the times immediately preceding this ruin, are called the last days, and the last times 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 That is, the last times of the Jewish, City, Nation, Economy. This manner of speaking frequently occurs, which, let our St. John himself interpret. 1 Joh. II. 13. There are many Antichrists, whereby we know it is the last time: and that this Nation is upon the very verge of destruction, whenas it hath already arrived at the utmost pitch of Infidelity, Apostasy, and wickedness.
III. With the same reference it is, that the times and state of things immediately following the destruction of Jerusalem, are called, a New Creation, New Heavens, and a New Earth. Isai. LXV. 17. Behold I create a New Heaven and a New Earth. When should that be? Read the whole Chapter, and you will find the Jews rejected and cut off, and from that time is that New Creation of the Evangelical world among the Gentiles.
Compare 2 Cor. V. 17. and Revel. XXI. 1, 2. where, the old Jerusalem being cut off, and destroyed, a new one succeeds; and New Heavens and a New Earth are created.
2 Pet. III. 13. We, according to his promise, look for New Heavens and a New Earth. The Heavens and the Earth of the Jewish Church, and Commonwealth must be all on fire, and the Mosaic Elements burnt up; but we, according to the promise made to us by Isaiah the Prophet, when all these are consumed, look for the New Creation of the Evangelical state.
IV. The day, the time, and the manner of the execution of this vengeance upon this people, are called, the day of the Lord, the day of Christ, his coming in the Clouds, in his Glory, in his Kingdom. Nor is this without reason, for from hence doth this form and mode of speaking take its rise.
Christ had not as yet appeared but in a state of Humility, contemned, blasphemed, and at length murdered by the Jews: His Gospel rejected, laughed at, and trampled underfoot: His followers pursued with extreme hatred, persecution and death itself: At length therefore, he displays himself in his Glory, his Kingdom, and Power, and calls for those cruel enemies of his, that they may be slain before him.
Acts II. 20. Before that great and notable day of the Lord come. Let us take notice how St. Peter applies that prophesy of Joel to those very times, and it will be clear enough, without any commentary, what that Day of the Lord is.
2 Thess. II. 2. As if the day of Christ was at hand, &c. To this also do those passages belong, Heb. X. 37. Yet a little while, and he, that shall come, will come. James V. 9. Behold the judge is at the door. Revel. I. 7. He cometh in the Clouds: and XXII. 12. Behold I come quickly. With many other passages of that nature, all which must be understood of Christ's coming in judgment and vengeance against that wicked Nation: and in this very sense must the words now before us be taken and no otherwise: I will that he tarry till I come. For thy part, Peter, thou shalt suffer death by thy Country-men the Jews; but as for him, I will that he shall tarry till I come and avenge myself upon this generation; and if I will so, what is that to thee? The story that is told of both these Apostles confirms this Exposition; for it is taken for granted by all, that St. Peter had his Crown of Martyrdom, before Jerusalem fell, and St. John survived the ruins of it.
VERS. XXIV.
THE Evangelist had said before, Chap. XIX. 35. He knoweth that he saith true; and here in this place he changeth the person, saying, We know that his testimony is true.
I. One would believe, that this was an Idiotism in the Chaldee and Syriac Tongue, to make 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , We know, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , I know, the same thing; which is not unusual in other Languages also, Joshua II. 9. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 I know. The Targumist hath 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which you would believe to be, We knew. 1 Sam. XVII. 28. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 I knew. Targumist, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 We knew. So amongst the Talmudists 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which seems to be, We know, we say. And indeed, sometimes, nay most frequently they so signify. But sometimes the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 I is included. So that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 should be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and so of the rest: which appears very clearly in that Expression: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Tell me what I am to see in my dream. For that so it must be rendered, I am to see, the Gloss and Context directs us, where 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 We will not therefore in this place take 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , We know, for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , I know, although the sense might not be very disagreeable if we did so. But,
II. We suppose the Evangelist both here and Chap. XIX. 35. referreth to an eye witness, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . For in all judicial causes the ocular testimony prevailed. If any person should testify that he himself saw the thing done, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , his witness must be received: For, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , True, when it is said of any testimony, does not signify barely that which is true, but that which was to believed and entertained for a sure and irrefragrable evidence. So that the meaning of these words is this; This is the Disciple who testifies of these things, and wrote them: And we all know that such a testimony obtains in all judgments whatever, for he was an eye witness, and saw that which he testifies.
CHAP. I.
VERS. I.
〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , In the beginning, in the same sense with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Bereshith, In the beginning, in the History of the Creation, Gen. I. 1. For the Evangelist proposeth this to himself, viz. to show how that by the Word by which the Creation was perfected, the Redemption was perfected also. That the second person in the Holy Trinity in the fullness of time became our Redeemer, as in the beginning of time he had been our Maker. Compare this with ver. 14.
| Ver. 1. | Ver. 14. |
| 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 | 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . |
| In the beginning was the word. | The word was made flesh. |
| 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 | 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . |
| Was with God. | Dwelt among us. |
| 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . | 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , &c. |
| The word was God. | Was made flesh, and we beheld, &c. |
〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , was the word ] There is no great necessity for us to make any very curious enquiry, whence our Evangelist should borrow this title, when in the History of the Creation we find it so often repeated, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And God said. It is observed almost by all that have of late undertaken a Commentary upon this Evangelist, that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , the word of the Lord, doth very frequently occur amongst the Targumists, which may something enlighten the matter now before us: And Moses brought the people out of the Camp 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to meet the word of the Lord. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And the word of the Lord accepted the face of Job 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And the word of the Lord shall laugh them to scorn . They believed 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the name of his word . 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And my word spared them . To add no more, Gen. XXVI. 3. Instead of, I will be with thee, the Targum hath it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and my word shall be thine help. So Gen. XXXIX. 2. And the Lord was with Joseph. Targ. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and the word of the Lord was Joseph's helper. And so all along that kind of phrase is most familiar amongst them.
Though this must be also confessed that the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 doth sometimes signify nothing else but I, Thou, He, and is frequently applied to men too. So Job VII. 8. Thine eyes are upon me. Targ. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Again, Job XXVII. 3. My breath is in me. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Targ. II Chron. XVI. 3. There is a league between me and thee. Targ. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Chap. XXIII. 16. He made a Covenant between him, and between all the people, and between the King. Targ. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 I observe that in Zach. VII. 12. the Targumist renders 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 by his spirit, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 by his word, if at least that may in strictness be so rendered, for by what hath been newly alleged, it seems that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 may be translated, the Lord by himself, or the Lord himself. I observe further, that the Greek Interpreters having mistaken the vowels of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in Habbak. III. 2. have rendered it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 before his face shall go a word; when it should have been, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , for the meaning of the Prophet there is, before his face went the Pestilence.
VERS. IV.
THE Evangelist proceeds from the Creation by the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , the Word, to the redemption of the world by the same word. He had declared how this word had given to all creatures their first being. v. 3. All things were made by him. And he now showeth how he restored life to man when he lay dead in trespasses and sins. Adam called his wives name Hevah, Life, Gen. III. 20. The Greek reads, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Adam called his wifes name, life. He called her life, who had brought in death; because he had now tasted a better life in the promise of the woman's seed. To which it is very probable our Evangelist had some reference in this place.
Life through Christ was light arising in the darkness of man's fall and sin; a light by which all believers were to walk. St. John seems in this clause to oppose the life and light exhibited in the Gospel, to that life and light which the Jews boasted of in their Law. They expected life from the works of the Law, and they knew no greater light than that of the Law, which therefore they extol with infinite boasts and praises which they give it. Take one instance for all: God said, let there be light. R. Simeon saith, light is written there five times, according to the five parts of the Law, [i. e. the Pentateuch] and God said, let there be light, according to the Book of Genesis, wherein God busying himself made the world. And there was light: according to the Book of Exodus, wherein the Israelites came out of darkness into light. And God saw the light that it was good: according to the Book of Leviticus, which is filled with rites and ceremonies. And God divided betwixt the light and the darkness; according to the Book of Numbers, which divided betwixt those that went out of Egypt, and those that entered into the land. And God called the light, day; according to the Book of Deuteronomy, which is replenished with manifold traditions. A Gloss this is upon light, full of darkness indeed!
VERS. V.
THIS light of promise and life by Christ, shined in the darkness of all the cloudy types and shadows under the Law, and obscurity of the Prophets. And those dark things comprehended it not, i. e. did not so cloud and suppress it, but it would break out; nor yet so comprehended it, but that there was an absolute necessity there should a greater light appear. I do so much the rather incline to such a Paraphrase upon this place, because I observe the Evangelist here treateth of the ways and means by which Christ made himself known to the world, before his great manifestation in the flesh. First, in the promise of life, ver. 4. Next, by Types and Prophecies; and lastly by John the Baptist.
VERS. IX:
〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 i. e. All the men that are in the world . Doth not the Sun rise 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 upon all that come into the world. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 All that come into the world are not able to make one fly . In the beginning of the year 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 All that come into the world present themselves before the Lord . There are numberless examples of this kind. The sense of the place is, that Christ shining forth in the light of the Gospel, is a light that lightens all the world; the light of the Law shone only upon the Jews; but this light spreads wider, even over the face of the whole earth.
VERS. XII.
〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , He empower'd them. So Eccl. V. 19. & VI. 2. He gave them the privilege, the liberty, the dignity of being called and becoming the Sons of God. Israel was once the Son and the first-born, Exod. IV. 22. but now the adoption of Sons to God was open and free to all Nations whatever.
VERS. XIII.
IT may be a question here, whether the Evangelist in this place opposeth regeneration to natural generation, or only to those ways by which the Jews fancy'd men were made the Sons of God. Expositors treat largely of the former, let us a little consider the latter.
I. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , not of bloods. Observe the Plural number . Our Rabbins say, that all Israel had thrown off Circumcision in Egypt—but at length they were circumcised, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and the blood of the Passover was mingled with the blood of the circumcised, and God accepted everyone of them, and kissed them. I said 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 while thou wert in thy bloods live: i. e. In the twofold blood, that of the Passover, and that of the Circumcision. The Israelites were brought into Covenant by three things, by Circumcision, by Washing, and by offering of Sacrifices.—In the same manner an heathen if he would be admitted into Covenant, he must of necessity be circumcised, baptized, and offer sacrifice . We see how 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , of bloods of the Passover and Circumcision, they say the Israelites were recovered from their degeneracy; and how 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of the bloods of Circumcision and Sacrifices (with the addition only of washing) they supposed the Gentiles might become the Sons of God, being by their Proselytism made Israelites, and the children of the Covenant; for they knew of no other adoption or Sonship.
II. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , of the will of the flesh. In the same sense wherein the Patriarchs and other Jews were ambitious by many wives to multiply children to themselves, as being of the seed of Israel, and children of the Covenant.
III. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , of the will of man, in that sense wherein they coveted so many proselytes, to admit them into the Religion of the Jews, and so into Covenant and Sonship with God.
These were the ways by which the Jews thought any became the Sons of God, that is, by being made Israelites. But it is far otherwise in the adoption and Sonship that accrues to us by the Gospel.
VERS. XIV.
THIS 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in this place imports the same thing as worthy. We saw his glory as what was worthy, or became the only begotten Son of God. He did not glister in any worldly pomp or grandeur, according to what the Jewish Nation fondly dreamed their Messiah would do; but he was decked with the glory of holiness, grace, truth, and the power of miracles.
VERS. XVI.
HE appeared amongst us, full of grace and truth, and all we who conversed with him, and saw his glory, of his fullness did receive grace and truth: Nay further we received grace toward the propagation of grace, i. e. the grace of Apostleship, that we might dispense and propagate the grace of the Gospel toward others; that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 denotes the end or design of a thing very frequently, there are hardly any but must needs know.
VERS. XXI.
THAT is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Luk. IX. 8, 19. One of the old Prophets that was risen again.
I. The Masters of Traditions were wont to say, that the spirit of Prophesy departed from Israel after the death of Zacharias and Malachi. So that we do not find they expected any Prophet till the days of the Messiah, nor indeed that any in that interim of time did pretend to that character.
II. They believed that at the coming of the Messiah the Prophets were to rise again.
They watchmen shall lift up the voice, with the voice together shall they sing, Isa. LII. 8.— R. Chaia bar Abba, and R. Johanan say, All the Prophets shall put forth a song with one voice.
All the just whom God shall raise from the dead, shall not return again into the dust. Gloss. Those whom he shall raise in the days of the Messiah.
To this Resurrection of the Saints they apply that of Micah V. 5. We shall raise against him seven shepherds: David in the middle, Adam, Seth, Methuselah, on his right hand: Abraham, Jacob, and Moses on his left. And eight principal men; but who are these? Jess, Saul, Samuel, Amos, Zephaniah, Zedekiah [or rather Hezekiah, as Kimch. in loc.] Messiah and Elijah. But indeed [saith R. Solomon] I do not well know whence they had these things. Nor indeed do I.
The Greek Interpreters instead of eight principal men have 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , eight bitings of men, a very foreign sense. They mistook in reading the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 for which they read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
Hence by how much nearer still the Kingdom of Heaven, or the expected time of Messiah 's coming drew on, by so much the more did they dream of the Resurrection of the Prophets. And when any person of more remarkable gravity, piety and holiness appeared amongst them, they were ready to conceive of him as a Prophet raised from the dead, Mat. XVI. 14. That therefore is the meaning of this question, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ; Art thou one of the Prophets raised from the dead?
VERS. XXV.
THE Jews likewise expected that the world should be renewed at the coming of the Messiah. In those years wherein God will renew his world. Aruch quoting these words, adds, In those thousand years. So also the Gloss upon the place.
Amongst other things they expected the purifying of the unclean. R. Solom. upon Ezek. XXXVI. 26. I will expiate you, and remove your uncleanness by the sprinkling of the water of purification. Kimchi upon Zach. IX. 6. The Rabbins of Blessed memory, have a Tradition that Elias will purify the bastards, and restore them to the Congregation. You have the like in Kiddush , 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Elias comes to distinguish the unclean, and purify them, &c.
When therefore they saw the Baptist bring in such an unusual rite, by which he admitted the Israelites into a new rule of Religion, they ask him by what authority he doth these things, if he himself were not either the Messiah, or Elias, or one of the Prophets raised from the dead.
It is very well known that they expected the coming of Elias, and that from the words of Mal. IV. 5. not rightly understood; which mistake the Greek Version seems to patronize, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , I will send you Elias the Teshbite; which word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 they add of themselves, in favor of their own Tradition; which indeed is too frequent an usage in that Version to look so far asquint toward the Jewish Traditions as to do injury to the Sacred Text.
VERS. XXIX.
SAINT John alludes plainly to the Lamb of the daily Sacrifice. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , which in shadow took away the sins of Israel.
I. It was commanded in the Law, that he that offered the Sacrifice should lay his hand upon the head of the Sacrifice, Levite. I. 4. & III. 2. & IV. 4, &c.
II. The reason of which usage was that he might, as it were, transfer his sins and guilt upon the head of the offering, which is more especially evident in the scape-goat, Levite. XVI. 22.
Hence Christ is said, Himself to have born our sins in his own body on the tree, I Pet. II. 24. as the offering upon the Altar was wont to do. He was made by God a sin for us, II Cor. V. 21. that is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 a Sacrifice for sin.
III. The same rite was used about the Lamb of the daily Sacrifice that was offered for all Israel. The stationary men [as they were called] or the Substitutes of the people, laying their hands upon the head of the Lamb.
To this therefore the words of the Baptist refer: The Lamb of God, that is, the daily Sacrifice, taketh away the sins of the world, as the Sacrifice did for all Israel. Behold here the true Lamb of God that taketh away the sins of the world.
VERS. XXXVIII.
THE proper and most immediate sense of this is, where dwellest, or, where lodgest thou? But I could willingly render it, as if it had been said, Where dost thou keep thy Sabbath? and from thence conjecture that day was the evening of the Sabbath. For whereas it is said, and they abode with him that day; it would be a little hard to understand it of the day that was now almost gone, and therefore we may suppose it meant of the following day; for it is added, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , it was now the tenth hour: It was about the middle of our November, when these things fell out in Bethabarah, as will easily appear to any one that will be accurate in calculating the times, and that little that was left of that day was then the tenth hour. It was then about Sun-set, and as it were the entrance of a new day; so that it might more properly have been said, They abode with him that night, rather than that day; only the Evangelist seems to point out that they remained with him the next day; which that it was the Sabbath, I will not so much contend, as (not without some reason) suppose.
Caesar duabus de causis, &c. Caesar for two reasons would not fight that day, partly because he had no Soldiers in the Ships, and partly because it was after the tenth hour of the day.
VERS. XLI.
SO 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Rab Nachman bar Isaac found him with Rab Honna: and many such like expressions in the Talmudic Authors, as also 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , we have found.
VERS. XLII.
I Do not see any reason why the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Joannes, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Joannas, should be here put for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Jonah, or why any should contend (as many do) that it should be the same with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Joannas.
I. In the third Chap. of St. Luke the name Joanan is sounded three ways in the Greek Pronunciation of it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Janna, v. 24. so 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 amongst the Rabbins, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Joanna, v. 27. and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Jonan, v. 30. but never 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Jonah.
II. Jonah was a name amongst the Jews very commonly used, and we meet with it frequently in the Talmudic Authors written 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Jonah; why therefore should not Peter 's father be allowed the name of Jonah, as well as that of John.
III. Especially when this Son of Jonah imitated the great Prophet of that name in this, that both Preached to the Gentiles, and both began their journey from Joppa.
Vulg. Qúod est, si interpreteris, Petra, which is by interpretation, a stone. So Act. IX. 26. Tabitha, which being interpreted is Dorcas. Beza, Caprea a Goat. But what? do the holy Penmen of the Scriptures make Lexicons, or play the School-masters, that they should only teach that the Syriac word Cepha, in the Greek language signifies 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , a stone, and Tabitha, Dorcas, that is, a Goat? No, rather they teach what Greek proper names answer to those Syriac proper names; for the Syriac proper name is here rendered into the Greek proper name, and not an appellative into an appellative, nor a proper name into an appellative.
But let the Vulgar have what it desires, and be it so, Thou shalt be called a Rock; yet you will scarce grant that our Blessed Savior should call Simon a rock in the direct and most ordinary sense, There is no rock save our God, II Sam. XXII. 32. where the Greek Interpreters instead of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 a rock, have 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , the Creator. Which word St. Peter himself makes use of I Pet. IV. 19. showing who is that rock indeed.
There is a rock or stone of stumbling indeed, as well as a foundation stone; and this stone of stumbling hath St. Peter been made, to the fall of many thousands, not by any fault of his, but theirs, who through ignorance or frowardness, or both, will esteem him as a rock upon which the Church is built.
If therefore they will so pertinaciously adhere to that Version, Et tu vocaberis Petra, let it be rendered into English thus, Thou wilt be called the Rock; and let us apprehend our blessed Lord speaking Prophetically, and foretelling that grand error that should spring up in the Church, viz. that Peter is a Rock, than which the Christian world hath not known anything more sad and destructive.
VERS. XLVI.
NOthing more common in the Talmudic Authors than 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Come and behold, come and see; sometimes 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
VERS. XLVII.
COmpare it with Isai. LXIII. 8. I saw thee (saith Christ) when thou wert under the fig tree? What doing there? doubtless not sleeping, or idling away his time, much less doing any ill thing. This would not have deserved so remarkable an Encomium as Christ gave him. We may therefore suppose him in that recess under the fig-tree, as having sequestered himself from the view of men, either for prayer, meditation, reading, or some such Religious performance; and so indeed from the view of men, that he must needs acknowledge Jesus for the Messiah, for that very reason that when no mortal eye could see, he saw and knew that he was there. Our Savior therefore calls him an Israelite indeed in whom there was no guile, because he sought out that retirement to pray so different from the usual craft and hypocrisy of that Nation, that were wont to pray publicly and in the streets that they might be seen of men.
And here Christ gathered to himself five Disciples, viz. Andrew, Peter, Philip, Nathanael, (who seems to be the same with Bartholomew ) and another whose name is not mentioned, ver. 35. 40. whom (by comparing Joh. XXI. 2.) we may conjecture to have been Thomas.
VERS. LI.
IF Christ doubled his affirmation as we here find it, why is it not so doubled in the other Evangelists? if he did not double it, why is it so here?
I. Perhaps the asseveration he useth in this place, may not be to the same things, and upon the same occasion, to which he useth the single Amen in other Evangelists.
II. Perhaps also St. John being to write for the use of the Hellenists, might write the word in the same Hebrew letters wherein Christ used it, and in the same letters also wherein the Greeks used it, retaining still the same Hebrew Idiom.
III. But however it may be observed, that whereas by all others the word Amen was generally used in the latter end of a speech or sentence, our Lord only useth it in the beginning as being himself the Amen, Revel. III. 14. and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Isai. LXI. 16. The God of Truth.
So that that single Amen which he used in the other Evangelists, contained in it the Gemination Amen, Amen. I the Amen the true and faithful witness, Amen, i. e. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , of a truth do say unto you, &c. Nor did it become any mortal man to speak Amen in the beginning of a sentence in the same manner as our Savior did. Indeed the very Masters of Traditions, who seemed to be the Oracles of that Nation, were wont to say, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 I speak in truth; but not Amen, I say unto you.
IV. Amen contains in it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 & 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Yea and Amen, II Cor. I. 20. Revel. I. 7. i. e. truth and stability, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Isai. XXV. 1. Interlin. Veritas, firmitas, Faithfulness▪ and truth. The other Evanglists express the word which our Savior useth: St. John doubles it to intimate the full sense of it.
I have been at some question with myself, whether I should insert in this place the blasphemous things which the Talmudic Authors belch out against the Holy Jesus, in allusion (shall I say?) or derision of this word Amen, to which name he entitled himself, and by which asseveration he confirmed his Doctrines. But that thou mightest (Reader) both know, and with equal indignation abhor the s • arlings and virulency of these men, take it in their own words, although I cannot without infinite reluctancy allege what they with all audaciousness have uttered.
They have a Tradition that Imma Shalom the wife of R. Eliezer, and her brother Rabban Gamaliel went to 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 a certain Philosopher (the Gloss hath it a certain Heretic ) of very great note for his integrity in giving judgment in matters, and taking no bribes. The woman brings him a golden candlestick, and prayeth him that the inheritance might be divided in part to her. Rabban Gamaliel objects, It is written amongst us that the daughter shall not inherit instead of the son. But the Philosopher answered, Since the time that you were removed from your land, the Law of Moses was made void: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and Aven was given, (he means the Gospel, but marks it with a scurrilous title.) and in that it is written 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the son and the daughter shall inherit together. The next day Rabban Gamaliel 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 brought him a Lybian Ass, then saith he unto them, I have found at the end of Aven (i. e. the Gospel) that it is written there 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 I Aven came not to diminish, but to add to the Law of Moses; where he abuseth both the name of our Blessed Savior, and his words too. Mat. V. 17.
And now after our just detestation of this execrable blasphemy, let us think what kind Judge this must be to whose judgment Rabban Gamaliel the President of the Sanhedrin, and his sister, wife to the great Eleazar should betake themselves. A Christian as it should seem by the whole contexture of the story; but alas! what kind of Christian that should make so light of Christ and his Gospel! However, were he a Christian of what kind soever, yet if there be any truth in this passage, it is not unworthy our taking notice of it, both as to the History of those times, as also as to that question, whether there were any Christian Judges at that time.
There are those that in this place observe an allusion to Jacob's Ladder: The meaning of this passage seems to be no other than this:
Of this ladder the Rabbins dream very pleasantly: The ladder is the ascent of the Altar, and the Altar itself. The Angels are Princes or Monarchs. The King of Babylon ascended seventy steps. The King of the Medes fifty and two. The King of Greece one hundred and eighty, the King of Edom, it is uncertain how many, &c. They reckon the breadth of the ladder to have been about eight thousand parasangae, i. e. about two and thirty thousand miles; and that the bulk of each Angel was about eight thousand English miles in compass. Admirable Mathematicians these indeed!
VERS. I.
〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , In the beginning, in the same sense with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Bereshith, In the beginning, in the History of the Creation, Gen. I. 1. For the Evangelist proposeth this to himself, viz. to show how that by the Word by which the Creation was perfected, the Redemption was perfected also. That the second person in the Holy Trinity in the fullness of time became our Redeemer, as in the beginning of time he had been our Maker. Compare this with ver. 14.
| Ver. 1. | Ver. 14. |
| 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 | 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . |
| In the beginning was the word. | The word was made flesh. |
| 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 | 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . |
| Was with God. | Dwelt among us. |
| 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . | 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , &c. |
| The word was God. | Was made flesh, and we beheld, &c. |
〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , was the word ] There is no great necessity for us to make any very curious enquiry, whence our Evangelist should borrow this title, when in the History of the Creation we find it so often repeated, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And God said. It is observed almost by all that have of late undertaken a Commentary upon this Evangelist, that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , the word of the Lord, doth very frequently occur amongst the Targumists, which may something enlighten the matter now before us: And Moses brought the people out of the Camp 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to meet the word of the Lord. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And the word of the Lord accepted the face of Job 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And the word of the Lord shall laugh them to scorn . They believed 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the name of his word . 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And my word spared them . To add no more, Gen. XXVI. 3. Instead of, I will be with thee, the Targum hath it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and my word shall be thine help. So Gen. XXXIX. 2. And the Lord was with Joseph. Targ. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and the word of the Lord was Joseph's helper. And so all along that kind of phrase is most familiar amongst them.
Though this must be also confessed that the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 doth sometimes signify nothing else but I, Thou, He, and is frequently applied to men too. So Job VII. 8. Thine eyes are upon me. Targ. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Again, Job XXVII. 3. My breath is in me. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Targ. II Chron. XVI. 3. There is a league between me and thee. Targ. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Chap. XXIII. 16. He made a Covenant between him, and between all the people, and between the King. Targ. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 I observe that in Zach. VII. 12. the Targumist renders 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 by his spirit, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 by his word, if at least that may in strictness be so rendered, for by what hath been newly alleged, it seems that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 may be translated, the Lord by himself, or the Lord himself. I observe further, that the Greek Interpreters having mistaken the vowels of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in Habbak. III. 2. have rendered it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 before his face shall go a word; when it should have been, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , for the meaning of the Prophet there is, before his face went the Pestilence.
VERS. IV.
THE Evangelist proceeds from the Creation by the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , the Word, to the redemption of the world by the same word. He had declared how this word had given to all creatures their first being. v. 3. All things were made by him. And he now showeth how he restored life to man when he lay dead in trespasses and sins. Adam called his wives name Hevah, Life, Gen. III. 20. The Greek reads, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Adam called his wifes name, life. He called her life, who had brought in death; because he had now tasted a better life in the promise of the woman's seed. To which it is very probable our Evangelist had some reference in this place.
Life through Christ was light arising in the darkness of man's fall and sin; a light by which all believers were to walk. St. John seems in this clause to oppose the life and light exhibited in the Gospel, to that life and light which the Jews boasted of in their Law. They expected life from the works of the Law, and they knew no greater light than that of the Law, which therefore they extol with infinite boasts and praises which they give it. Take one instance for all: God said, let there be light. R. Simeon saith, light is written there five times, according to the five parts of the Law, [i. e. the Pentateuch] and God said, let there be light, according to the Book of Genesis, wherein God busying himself made the world. And there was light: according to the Book of Exodus, wherein the Israelites came out of darkness into light. And God saw the light that it was good: according to the Book of Leviticus, which is filled with rites and ceremonies. And God divided betwixt the light and the darkness; according to the Book of Numbers, which divided betwixt those that went out of Egypt, and those that entered into the land. And God called the light, day; according to the Book of Deuteronomy, which is replenished with manifold traditions. A Gloss this is upon light, full of darkness indeed!
VERS. V.
THIS light of promise and life by Christ, shined in the darkness of all the cloudy types and shadows under the Law, and obscurity of the Prophets. And those dark things comprehended it not, i. e. did not so cloud and suppress it, but it would break out; nor yet so comprehended it, but that there was an absolute necessity there should a greater light appear. I do so much the rather incline to such a Paraphrase upon this place, because I observe the Evangelist here treateth of the ways and means by which Christ made himself known to the world, before his great manifestation in the flesh. First, in the promise of life, ver. 4. Next, by Types and Prophecies; and lastly by John the Baptist.
VERS. IX:
〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 i. e. All the men that are in the world . Doth not the Sun rise 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 upon all that come into the world. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 All that come into the world are not able to make one fly . In the beginning of the year 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 All that come into the world present themselves before the Lord . There are numberless examples of this kind. The sense of the place is, that Christ shining forth in the light of the Gospel, is a light that lightens all the world; the light of the Law shone only upon the Jews; but this light spreads wider, even over the face of the whole earth.
VERS. XII.
〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , He empower'd them. So Eccl. V. 19. & VI. 2. He gave them the privilege, the liberty, the dignity of being called and becoming the Sons of God. Israel was once the Son and the first-born, Exod. IV. 22. but now the adoption of Sons to God was open and free to all Nations whatever.
VERS. XIII.
IT may be a question here, whether the Evangelist in this place opposeth regeneration to natural generation, or only to those ways by which the Jews fancy'd men were made the Sons of God. Expositors treat largely of the former, let us a little consider the latter.
I. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , not of bloods. Observe the Plural number . Our Rabbins say, that all Israel had thrown off Circumcision in Egypt—but at length they were circumcised, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and the blood of the Passover was mingled with the blood of the circumcised, and God accepted everyone of them, and kissed them. I said 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 while thou wert in thy bloods live: i. e. In the twofold blood, that of the Passover, and that of the Circumcision. The Israelites were brought into Covenant by three things, by Circumcision, by Washing, and by offering of Sacrifices.—In the same manner an heathen if he would be admitted into Covenant, he must of necessity be circumcised, baptized, and offer sacrifice . We see how 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , of bloods of the Passover and Circumcision, they say the Israelites were recovered from their degeneracy; and how 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of the bloods of Circumcision and Sacrifices (with the addition only of washing) they supposed the Gentiles might become the Sons of God, being by their Proselytism made Israelites, and the children of the Covenant; for they knew of no other adoption or Sonship.
II. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , of the will of the flesh. In the same sense wherein the Patriarchs and other Jews were ambitious by many wives to multiply children to themselves, as being of the seed of Israel, and children of the Covenant.
III. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , of the will of man, in that sense wherein they coveted so many proselytes, to admit them into the Religion of the Jews, and so into Covenant and Sonship with God.
These were the ways by which the Jews thought any became the Sons of God, that is, by being made Israelites. But it is far otherwise in the adoption and Sonship that accrues to us by the Gospel.
VERS. XIV.
THIS 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in this place imports the same thing as worthy. We saw his glory as what was worthy, or became the only begotten Son of God. He did not glister in any worldly pomp or grandeur, according to what the Jewish Nation fondly dreamed their Messiah would do; but he was decked with the glory of holiness, grace, truth, and the power of miracles.
VERS. XVI.
HE appeared amongst us, full of grace and truth, and all we who conversed with him, and saw his glory, of his fullness did receive grace and truth: Nay further we received grace toward the propagation of grace, i. e. the grace of Apostleship, that we might dispense and propagate the grace of the Gospel toward others; that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 denotes the end or design of a thing very frequently, there are hardly any but must needs know.
VERS. XXI.
THAT is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Luk. IX. 8, 19. One of the old Prophets that was risen again.
I. The Masters of Traditions were wont to say, that the spirit of Prophesy departed from Israel after the death of Zacharias and Malachi. So that we do not find they expected any Prophet till the days of the Messiah, nor indeed that any in that interim of time did pretend to that character.
II. They believed that at the coming of the Messiah the Prophets were to rise again.
They watchmen shall lift up the voice, with the voice together shall they sing, Isa. LII. 8.— R. Chaia bar Abba, and R. Johanan say, All the Prophets shall put forth a song with one voice.
All the just whom God shall raise from the dead, shall not return again into the dust. Gloss. Those whom he shall raise in the days of the Messiah.
To this Resurrection of the Saints they apply that of Micah V. 5. We shall raise against him seven shepherds: David in the middle, Adam, Seth, Methuselah, on his right hand: Abraham, Jacob, and Moses on his left. And eight principal men; but who are these? Jess, Saul, Samuel, Amos, Zephaniah, Zedekiah [or rather Hezekiah, as Kimch. in loc.] Messiah and Elijah. But indeed [saith R. Solomon] I do not well know whence they had these things. Nor indeed do I.
The Greek Interpreters instead of eight principal men have 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , eight bitings of men, a very foreign sense. They mistook in reading the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 for which they read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
Hence by how much nearer still the Kingdom of Heaven, or the expected time of Messiah 's coming drew on, by so much the more did they dream of the Resurrection of the Prophets. And when any person of more remarkable gravity, piety and holiness appeared amongst them, they were ready to conceive of him as a Prophet raised from the dead, Mat. XVI. 14. That therefore is the meaning of this question, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ; Art thou one of the Prophets raised from the dead?
VERS. XXV.
THE Jews likewise expected that the world should be renewed at the coming of the Messiah. In those years wherein God will renew his world. Aruch quoting these words, adds, In those thousand years. So also the Gloss upon the place.
Amongst other things they expected the purifying of the unclean. R. Solom. upon Ezek. XXXVI. 26. I will expiate you, and remove your uncleanness by the sprinkling of the water of purification. Kimchi upon Zach. IX. 6. The Rabbins of Blessed memory, have a Tradition that Elias will purify the bastards, and restore them to the Congregation. You have the like in Kiddush , 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Elias comes to distinguish the unclean, and purify them, &c.
When therefore they saw the Baptist bring in such an unusual rite, by which he admitted the Israelites into a new rule of Religion, they ask him by what authority he doth these things, if he himself were not either the Messiah, or Elias, or one of the Prophets raised from the dead.
It is very well known that they expected the coming of Elias, and that from the words of Mal. IV. 5. not rightly understood; which mistake the Greek Version seems to patronize, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , I will send you Elias the Teshbite; which word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 they add of themselves, in favor of their own Tradition; which indeed is too frequent an usage in that Version to look so far asquint toward the Jewish Traditions as to do injury to the Sacred Text.
VERS. XXIX.
SAINT John alludes plainly to the Lamb of the daily Sacrifice. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , which in shadow took away the sins of Israel.
I. It was commanded in the Law, that he that offered the Sacrifice should lay his hand upon the head of the Sacrifice, Levite. I. 4. & III. 2. & IV. 4, &c.
II. The reason of which usage was that he might, as it were, transfer his sins and guilt upon the head of the offering, which is more especially evident in the scape-goat, Levite. XVI. 22.
Hence Christ is said, Himself to have born our sins in his own body on the tree, I Pet. II. 24. as the offering upon the Altar was wont to do. He was made by God a sin for us, II Cor. V. 21. that is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 a Sacrifice for sin.
III. The same rite was used about the Lamb of the daily Sacrifice that was offered for all Israel. The stationary men [as they were called] or the Substitutes of the people, laying their hands upon the head of the Lamb.
To this therefore the words of the Baptist refer: The Lamb of God, that is, the daily Sacrifice, taketh away the sins of the world, as the Sacrifice did for all Israel. Behold here the true Lamb of God that taketh away the sins of the world.
VERS. XXXVIII.
THE proper and most immediate sense of this is, where dwellest, or, where lodgest thou? But I could willingly render it, as if it had been said, Where dost thou keep thy Sabbath? and from thence conjecture that day was the evening of the Sabbath. For whereas it is said, and they abode with him that day; it would be a little hard to understand it of the day that was now almost gone, and therefore we may suppose it meant of the following day; for it is added, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , it was now the tenth hour: It was about the middle of our November, when these things fell out in Bethabarah, as will easily appear to any one that will be accurate in calculating the times, and that little that was left of that day was then the tenth hour. It was then about Sun-set, and as it were the entrance of a new day; so that it might more properly have been said, They abode with him that night, rather than that day; only the Evangelist seems to point out that they remained with him the next day; which that it was the Sabbath, I will not so much contend, as (not without some reason) suppose.
Caesar duabus de causis, &c. Caesar for two reasons would not fight that day, partly because he had no Soldiers in the Ships, and partly because it was after the tenth hour of the day.
VERS. XLII.
I Do not see any reason why the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Joannes, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Joannas, should be here put for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Jonah, or why any should contend (as many do) that it should be the same with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Joannas.
I. In the third Chap. of St. Luke the name Joanan is sounded three ways in the Greek Pronunciation of it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Janna, v. 24. so 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 amongst the Rabbins, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Joanna, v. 27. and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Jonan, v. 30. but never 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Jonah.
II. Jonah was a name amongst the Jews very commonly used, and we meet with it frequently in the Talmudic Authors written 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Jonah; why therefore should not Peter 's father be allowed the name of Jonah, as well as that of John.
III. Especially when this Son of Jonah imitated the great Prophet of that name in this, that both Preached to the Gentiles, and both began their journey from Joppa.
Vulg. Qúod est, si interpreteris, Petra, which is by interpretation, a stone. So Act. IX. 26. Tabitha, which being interpreted is Dorcas. Beza, Caprea a Goat. But what? do the holy Penmen of the Scriptures make Lexicons, or play the School-masters, that they should only teach that the Syriac word Cepha, in the Greek language signifies 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , a stone, and Tabitha, Dorcas, that is, a Goat? No, rather they teach what Greek proper names answer to those Syriac proper names; for the Syriac proper name is here rendered into the Greek proper name, and not an appellative into an appellative, nor a proper name into an appellative.
But let the Vulgar have what it desires, and be it so, Thou shalt be called a Rock; yet you will scarce grant that our Blessed Savior should call Simon a rock in the direct and most ordinary sense, There is no rock save our God, II Sam. XXII. 32. where the Greek Interpreters instead of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 a rock, have 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , the Creator. Which word St. Peter himself makes use of I Pet. IV. 19. showing who is that rock indeed.
There is a rock or stone of stumbling indeed, as well as a foundation stone; and this stone of stumbling hath St. Peter been made, to the fall of many thousands, not by any fault of his, but theirs, who through ignorance or frowardness, or both, will esteem him as a rock upon which the Church is built.
If therefore they will so pertinaciously adhere to that Version, Et tu vocaberis Petra, let it be rendered into English thus, Thou wilt be called the Rock; and let us apprehend our blessed Lord speaking Prophetically, and foretelling that grand error that should spring up in the Church, viz. that Peter is a Rock, than which the Christian world hath not known anything more sad and destructive.
VERS. XLVI.
NOthing more common in the Talmudic Authors than 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Come and behold, come and see; sometimes 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
VERS. XLVII.
COmpare it with Isai. LXIII. 8. I saw thee (saith Christ) when thou wert under the fig tree? What doing there? doubtless not sleeping, or idling away his time, much less doing any ill thing. This would not have deserved so remarkable an Encomium as Christ gave him. We may therefore suppose him in that recess under the fig-tree, as having sequestered himself from the view of men, either for prayer, meditation, reading, or some such Religious performance; and so indeed from the view of men, that he must needs acknowledge Jesus for the Messiah, for that very reason that when no mortal eye could see, he saw and knew that he was there. Our Savior therefore calls him an Israelite indeed in whom there was no guile, because he sought out that retirement to pray so different from the usual craft and hypocrisy of that Nation, that were wont to pray publicly and in the streets that they might be seen of men.
And here Christ gathered to himself five Disciples, viz. Andrew, Peter, Philip, Nathanael, (who seems to be the same with Bartholomew ) and another whose name is not mentioned, ver. 35. 40. whom (by comparing Joh. XXI. 2.) we may conjecture to have been Thomas.
VERS. LI.
IF Christ doubled his affirmation as we here find it, why is it not so doubled in the other Evangelists? if he did not double it, why is it so here?
I. Perhaps the asseveration he useth in this place, may not be to the same things, and upon the same occasion, to which he useth the single Amen in other Evangelists.
II. Perhaps also St. John being to write for the use of the Hellenists, might write the word in the same Hebrew letters wherein Christ used it, and in the same letters also wherein the Greeks used it, retaining still the same Hebrew Idiom.
III. But however it may be observed, that whereas by all others the word Amen was generally used in the latter end of a speech or sentence, our Lord only useth it in the beginning as being himself the Amen, Revel. III. 14. and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Isai. LXI. 16. The God of Truth.
So that that single Amen which he used in the other Evangelists, contained in it the Gemination Amen, Amen. I the Amen the true and faithful witness, Amen, i. e. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , of a truth do say unto you, &c. Nor did it become any mortal man to speak Amen in the beginning of a sentence in the same manner as our Savior did. Indeed the very Masters of Traditions, who seemed to be the Oracles of that Nation, were wont to say, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 I speak in truth; but not Amen, I say unto you.
IV. Amen contains in it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 & 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Yea and Amen, II Cor. I. 20. Revel. I. 7. i. e. truth and stability, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Isai. XXV. 1. Interlin. Veritas, firmitas, Faithfulness▪ and truth. The other Evanglists express the word which our Savior useth: St. John doubles it to intimate the full sense of it.
I have been at some question with myself, whether I should insert in this place the blasphemous things which the Talmudic Authors belch out against the Holy Jesus, in allusion (shall I say?) or derision of this word Amen, to which name he entitled himself, and by which asseveration he confirmed his Doctrines. But that thou mightest (Reader) both know, and with equal indignation abhor the s • arlings and virulency of these men, take it in their own words, although I cannot without infinite reluctancy allege what they with all audaciousness have uttered.
They have a Tradition that Imma Shalom the wife of R. Eliezer, and her brother Rabban Gamaliel went to 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 a certain Philosopher (the Gloss hath it a certain Heretic ) of very great note for his integrity in giving judgment in matters, and taking no bribes. The woman brings him a golden candlestick, and prayeth him that the inheritance might be divided in part to her. Rabban Gamaliel objects, It is written amongst us that the daughter shall not inherit instead of the son. But the Philosopher answered, Since the time that you were removed from your land, the Law of Moses was made void: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and Aven was given, (he means the Gospel, but marks it with a scurrilous title.) and in that it is written 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the son and the daughter shall inherit together. The next day Rabban Gamaliel 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 brought him a Lybian Ass, then saith he unto them, I have found at the end of Aven (i. e. the Gospel) that it is written there 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 I Aven came not to diminish, but to add to the Law of Moses; where he abuseth both the name of our Blessed Savior, and his words too. Mat. V. 17.
And now after our just detestation of this execrable blasphemy, let us think what kind Judge this must be to whose judgment Rabban Gamaliel the President of the Sanhedrin, and his sister, wife to the great Eleazar should betake themselves. A Christian as it should seem by the whole contexture of the story; but alas! what kind of Christian that should make so light of Christ and his Gospel! However, were he a Christian of what kind soever, yet if there be any truth in this passage, it is not unworthy our taking notice of it, both as to the History of those times, as also as to that question, whether there were any Christian Judges at that time.
There are those that in this place observe an allusion to Jacob's Ladder: The meaning of this passage seems to be no other than this:
Of this ladder the Rabbins dream very pleasantly: The ladder is the ascent of the Altar, and the Altar itself. The Angels are Princes or Monarchs. The King of Babylon ascended seventy steps. The King of the Medes fifty and two. The King of Greece one hundred and eighty, the King of Edom, it is uncertain how many, &c. They reckon the breadth of the ladder to have been about eight thousand parasangae, i. e. about two and thirty thousand miles; and that the bulk of each Angel was about eight thousand English miles in compass. Admirable Mathematicians these indeed!
CHAP. II.
VERS. I.
A Virgin marries 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 on the fourth day of the week, and a widow on the fifth. This custom came not in but from the decree of Ezra, and so onward, for the Sanhedrin doth not sit, but on the second and the fifth day; and by the decree of Ezra when the Sanhedrin assembled every day, then was it lawful to take a wife on any day. There is a twofold reason given for this restraint.
I. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Virgin was to be marry'd on the fourth day of the week, because the Assembly of the Twenty three met on the fifth; so that if the husband should find his wife to be no virgin, but already violated, he might have recourse to the Consistory in the heat of his displeasure, and procure just punishment for her according to Law. But why then might they not as well marry on the first day of the week, seeing the Beth din met on the second as well as the fifth.
II. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Lest the Sabbath should be polluted by preparations for the Nuptials, for the first, second, and third day of the week are allowed for those kind of preparations. And the reason why the widow was to be marry'd on the fifth day was, that her husband might rejoice with her for three days together, viz. fifth, sixth, and the Sabbath-day.
If therefore our bride in this place was a virgin, then the Nuptials were celebrated on the fourth day of the week, which is our Wednesday. If she was a widow then she was marry'd on the fifth day of the week, which is our Thursday. Let us therefore number the days according to our Evangelist, and let it be but granted that that was the Sabbath in which it is said, They abode with him all that day, Cap. I. v. 39. Then on the first day of the week Christ went into Galilee and met with Nathanael. So that the third day from thence is the fourth day of the week; but as to that let everyone reckon as he himself shall think fit.
Amongst the Talmudists it is sometimes 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 sometimes 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 sometimes 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 sometimes 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 all which denotes matter of pomp and gladness.
- I. The Virgin to be marry'd cometh forth from her Fathers house, to that of her husbands. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in some veil, but with her hair dishevel'd, or her head uncover'd.
- II. If any person meets her upon that day, he gives her the way, which once was done by King Agrippa himself.
- III. They carry before her a cup of wine which they were wont to call 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the cup of Trumah, which denoted that she for her unspotted virginity might have married a Priest, and eaten of the Trumah.
- IV. Skipping and dancing they were wont to sing the praises of the Bride. In Palestine they used these words, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 she needs no paint nor stibium, no plaiting of the hair, or any such thing, for she is of herself most beautiful.
- V. They scattered some kind of grain or corn amongst the children, that they if occasion should serve might bear witness hereafter that they saw that woman a marry'd virgin.
- VI. They sprinkled also or sowed barley before them, by that ceremony denoting their fruitfulness . Whether these sports were used at the wedding where our Savior was present, let others inquire.
- VII. In Sotah there is mention of Crowns which the bride and bridegroom wore, a • also what fashion they were of, and of what materials they were made.
- VIII. Because of the mirth that was expected at Nuptial solemnities▪ they forbad all weddings celebrating within the feasts of the Passover, Pentecost, and Tabernacles, Because there were great rejoicings at Nuptials, and they must not intermingle one joy with another; that is, the joy of Nuptials with the joy of a festival .
- IX. The Nuptial festivity was continued for the whole seven days which we also see of old, Judge. XIX. 12.
The mother of Jesus was there, not invited (as it should seem) with Christ and his Disciples, but had been there before the invitation made to them.
You may conceive who were the usual nuptial guests by those words of Maimon . 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The bridegroom and his companions, the children of the bridechamber are not bound to make a Tabernacle.
I. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in a more general sense denotes a friend or companion, Judge. XIV. 2. II Sam. XIII. 3. but it is more particularly applied to those friends that are the nuptial guests.
II. But in a most strict sense to those two mentioned , Of old they appointed two Shoshbenin, one for the bridegroom, the other for the bride, that they should minister to them, especially at their entry into the bridal chamber. They were especially instituted for this end, that they should take care and provide that there should be no fraud nor deceit as to the tokens of the bride's virginity. So Gloss. upon the place . The Rabbins very ridiculously (as they almost always do) tell a trifling story, that Michael and Gabriel were the two Shoshbenin at Adam and Eves wedding .
But as to the signification of this nuptial term in a more large sense, we may see further. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 If any amongst the brethren make a Shoshbenuth, while the father is yet alive, when the Sheshbenuth returns, that also is returned too; for the Shoshbenuth is required even before the Beth Din; but if any one send to his friend any measures of wine, those are not required before the Beth Din, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 for this was a deed of gift, or work of charity.
The words are very obscure, but they seem to bear this sense, viz. This was the manner of the Shoshbenuth. Some Bachelor or single person, for joy of his friends marriage, takes something along with him to eat and be merry with the Bridegroom; when it comes to the turn of this single person to marry, this Bridegroom to whom he had brought this portion, is bound to return the same kindness again. Nay, if the father should make a wedding for his Son, and his friends should bring gifts along with them in honor of the nuptials, and give them to his Son [the Bridegroom] the father was bound to return the same kindness when ever any of those friends should think fit to marry themselves. But if any one should send the Bridegroom to congratulate his nuptials, either wine or oil, or any such gift, and not come himself to eat and make merry with them, this was not of the nature of the Shoshbenuth, nor could be required back again before the Tribunal, because that was a free gift.
IV. Christ therefore and five of his Disciples were not of these voluntary Shoshbenim at this wedding, for they were invited guests, and so of the number of those that were called the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 children of the bride-chamber distinguished from the Shoshbenim. But whether our Savior's mother was to be accounted either the one or the other, is a vain and needless question. Perhaps she had the care of preparing and managing the necessaries for the wedding, as having some relation either with the Bridegroom or the Bride.
VERS. VI.
〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Gloss. If any one have water fit to drink, and that water by chance contract any uncleanness, let him fill the stone vessel with it.
〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 where the Commentators do indeed grant that by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 may be understood marble vessels, although they admit of another rendering, but as to 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 there is no controversy.
The number of the six water-pots, I suppose needs not be ascribed to any custom of the Nation, but rather to the multitude then present. It is true indeed, that at nuptials and other feasts there were water-pots always set, for the guests to wash their hands at; but the number of the vessels, and the quantity of the water, was always proportioned according to the number of the guests; for both the hands and vessels, and perhaps the feet of some of them, were wont to be washed.