Works

VERS. I.

WE may take these words in opposition to what is spoken concerning Israel. Israel is called a Vine, Psal. LXXX. 8. Isa. V. 7. Jer. II. 21, &c. In Vajicra rabba , the parallel is drawn between Israel and a Vine, and the similitude is carried on to sixteen particulars, for the most part improper and unsuitable enough.

But that which is principally to be regarded in this place is this, that hitherto indeed Israel had been the Vine, into which everyone that would betake himself to the worship of the true God, was to be set and grafted in. But from hence forward they were to be planted no more into the Jewish Religion, but into the profession of Christ. To which that in Act. XI. 26. hath some reference where the Disciples were first called Christians, that is, no longer Jews or Israelites.

Our Savior as we have said before, discoursed these things immediately after that he had instituted the Holy Eucharist; whiles he was ordaining that Holy Sacrament, he had said, This is the New Testament in my blood, and from thence immediately adds, I am the true Vine; so that for the future, the Church is to be under the administration of a New Testament no longer as the Jewish Church under that of the old; and from hence forward I am the true Vine, into which all the branches of the Church must be engrafted, and not into the Israelitish Vine anymore.

VERS. III.

CHRIST having discoursed of the Vine and of the branches, these words seem to have an allusion to that Law concerning 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or the uncircumcision of the Tree when first planted, Levite. XIX. 23. For the first three years the fruit was to be accounted as uncircumcis'd, unclean, and not to be eaten; but you my branches, now are clean through my word; that word which I have been preaching to you for these three years.

VERS. IV.

INdeed a true fixing and abiding in Christ is by a true faith. But may we not suppose our Savior here more peculiarly warning them against Apostasy or falling back from the Gospel into Judaism, a plague likely to rage exceedingly in the Church?

VERS. VI.

SEE Ezek. XV. 1. where D. Kimchi paraphrases in this manner: O Son of man I do not ask thee concerning the Vine that beareth fruit, (for so it ought to be accounted) but concerning the branch [ 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ] which is amongst the trees of the wood, unfruitful, even as the trees themselves are. Where by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which we render branch (for so it is commonly rendered) we are to understand the wild vine. So R. Solomon in loc. I do not speak, saith God, of the Vine in the Vineyard that bears fruit, but of the branch of the wild vine that grows in the woods. So that the sense of the Prophet is, O Son of man, what is the Vine-tree more than any tree? viz. a branch of the wild vine which grows amongst the trees of the forest, which is unfruitful even as they are.

And this is our Savior's meaning, Every branch in me that bringeth not forth fruit is • ast forth, like the branch in the Vine that grows wild in the forest, which is good for nothing but to be burned.

And to this sense would I take the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the same Prophet, Chap. VIII. 17. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 where the Masoreths note upon the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that this is one of those eighteen words that are corrected by the Scribes; and they will have it read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 It would be too long to recite the various opinions of Expositors upon this place. The Seventy of the Roman Edition, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . The Alexandrian Edition, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Targ. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 They bring confusion to their own faces. Several other ways the Rabbins and others; but for my part I would render 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or as the Masoreth reads it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 not by nose, or nostrils, but by anger; and so this should be the sense, They commit these abominations, filling the land with violence, and have turned to provoke me; and behold they send the branch of the wild vine, to my wrath, or to their own wrath: i. e. to what they have deserved.

q. d. In the same manner that any one puts wood to the fire, the branch of the wild vine, that it may the quicklier be burnt, so do these put the branch to my wrath, that it may burn the more fiercely; hence it follows, Therefore will I also deal in fury, mine eye shall not spare, &c.

VERS. XII.

Every Sabbath they added that blessing toward that course of Priests, who having performed their service the last week, were gone off; let him who dwells in this house, plant among you 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 brotherhood, love, peace and friendship.

Our Savior once and again repeats that Command, Love one another; he calls it a new Commandment, Chap. XIII. 34. for their Traditions had in a great measure put that Command of loving one another out of date, and that particularly by very impious vows they would be making. We have a little hint of it, Mat. XV. 5. and more in the Treatise Nedarim. See also Mat. V. 43. Thou shalt hate thine enemy. This rule obtained in the Jewish Schools. And upon that precept, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself; let us see the mighty charitable Gloss in Chetubb , Thou shalt love thy neighhour as thyself, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that is, decree him to an easy death: namely when he is adjudged by the Sanhedrin to die.

When you consider the frequent repetition of this precept, Love one another, consider also that passage, Mat. X. 34. I came not to send peace but a sword; and then having reflected on those horrid seditions and mutual slaughters wherewith the Jewish Nation raging within its self in most bloody discords and intestine broils, was even by its self wasted and overwhelmed, you will more clearly see the necessity and reasonableness of this command of loving one another, as also the great truth of that expression, By this they shall know that ye are my Disciples if ye love one another.

VERS. XV.

Thus is it said of Abraham, the friend of God, Gen. XVIII. 19.

VERS. XVI.

FOR it was a custom amongst the Jews that the Disciple should choose to himself his own Master , Joshua ben Perachiah said 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 choose to thyself a master, and get a Colleague.

VERS. XXII.

So also ver. 24. in both places the passage is to be understood of that peculiar sin of rejecting the Messiah: If I had not spoken to them, and done those things that made it demonstrably evident that I was the Messiah, they had not had sin, that is, they had not been guilty of this sin of rejecting me. But when I have done such things amongst them, it is but too plain that they do what they do in mere hatred to me and to my Father. Our Savior explains what sin he here meaneth in Chap. XVI. 9.

VERS. II.

THIS I presume must be understood of a casting out from the whole Congregation of Israel, because I know the Jews always proceeded in that manner against the Samaritans; and certainly the Disciples of Jesus were full as hateful to them as the Samaritans could be. Nay they often call the Christians by the name of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Cuthites as well as those.

Those that were cast out of the Church they despoil'd of all their goods, according to Ezra X. 8. which they also did to those that were Shammatiz'd , whence it may be a question whether Shammaetizing did not cast out of the whole Congregation; and again, whether one cast out of the whole Congregation might be ever readmitted.

We may take notice of what is said in Avodah Zarah , 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 No one that relapseth may be received again forever. The Gloss tells us that the passage concerns the Plebeians or Laics, who having taken upon themselves any religious rule of life, go back again from that profession, they do not admit them 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 into that order and society again. Whether therefore those that fell off from the Gospel returning to their Judaism again, were ever admitted into the Jewish Church, after they had voluntarily forsaken it, might be an enquiry; but these things only by the by.

There was in truth a twofold Epocha of the persecution of the Apostolical Church, namely, both before that Apostasy of which we have such frequent mention, and also after it. Our Savior had foretold the Apostasy in that tremendous Parable about the unclean spirit cast out, and returning again with seven worse. So shall it be also, saith he, with this wicked generation, Mat. XII. 45. The footsteps of this we may discern almost in every Epistle of the Apostles.

It is worthy observation that of 2 Thes. II. 3. This day of the Lord shall not come except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed. The day of the Lord here spoken of was that wherein Christ should come and reveal himself in that remarkable vengeance against Jerusalem, and the Jewish Nation, of which kind of expression we shall say more on Chap. XXI. 22. The Apostasy or falling away, and revelation of the man of sin, was to precede that day; which might be easily made out by a History of those times, if I were to do the business either of an Historian or a Chronologer.

When therefore the severe and cruel persecution was first raised by the unbelieving Jews, before this falling away of Christians, it must needs be greatly increased afterward by them and the Apostates together: Which distinction we may easily observe out of this verse.

So the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the Zealots, of whom we have mention in Sanhedr. , 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Zealots kill him. Gloss. These are those good men who are endued with zeal in the cause of God. Such who with their own hands immediately slew the transgressor, not staying for the judgment of the Sanhedrin. So in the place before quoted, The Priest that ministers at the Altar, in his uncleanness, they do not bring before the Sanhedrin, but they bring him out into the Court, and there brain him with the pieces of wood provided to maintain the fire upon the Altar.

What infinite mischiefs and effusion of blood such pretexts of zeal toward God might occasion, it is easy to imagine, and very direful instances have already witnessed to the world: Hence was it that they so often went about to have ston'd our Savior. Hence those forty and more that had conspired against St. Paul. And those Zealots whose butcherly cruelties are so infamous in the Jewish story, took the occasion of their horrid madness first from this liberty.

From such kind of Villains as these the Disciples of Christ could have little safeguard; indeed they were greatly endangered upon a threefold account: I. From the stroke of Excommunication, by which they were spoiled of their goods and estates, Heb. X. 34. II. From the sentence of the Sanhedrin dooming them either to be scourged or slain. III. From these Assasins, for by this name (a name too well known in Europe ) we will call them. We pronounce Assasine, and Assasination; Gul. Tyrius calls them Assysins, whom it may be worth the while to consult about the original of that name .

VERS. VIII.

THE Holy Spirit had absented himself from that Nation now for the space of four hundred years or thereabout; and therefore when he should be given and poured out in a way and in measures so very wonderful, he could not but evince it to the world that Jesus was the true Messiah, the Son of God, who had so miraculously poured out the Holy Spirit amongst them; and consequently could not but reprove and redargue the world of sin, because they believed not in him.

VERS. X.

THAT this righteousness here mentioned is to be understood of the righteousness of Christ, hardly any but will readily enough grant; but the question is, what sort of righteousness of his is here meant, whether his personal and inherent, or his communicated and justifying righteousness? we may say that both may be meant here.

I. Because he went to the Father, it abundantly argu'd him a just and righteous person, held under no guilt at all, however condemned by men as a malefactor.

II. Because he poured out the Spirit, it argu'd the merit of his righteousness, for otherwise he could not in that manner have given the Holy Spirit. And indeed, that what is chiefly meant here is that righteousness of his by which we are justified, this may persuade us that so many and so great things are spoken concerning it in the Holy▪ Scriptures. Isai. LVI. 1. My Salvation is near to come, and my righteousness to be revealed, Dan. IX. 29. To bring in everlasting righteousness. Jer. XXIII. 6. This is his name by which he shall be called, THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS. And in the Epistles of the Apostles, especially those of St. Paul, this righteousness is frequently and highly celebrated, seeming indeed the main and principal subject of the Doctrines of the Gospel.

In the stead of many others let this serve for all, Rom. I. 17. For therein [viz. in the Gospel] is the righteousness of God revealed, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , from faith to faith, which words may be a good Comment upon the foregoing Clause.

I. The Law teacheth faith; that is, that we believe in God. But the Gospel directs us to proceed from faith to faith, viz. from faith in God, to faith in Christ; for true and saving faith is not a mere naked recumbency immediately upon God, which faith the Jews were wont to profess, but faith in God, by the mediation of faith in Christ.

II. In the Law the righteousness of God was revealed condemning, but in the Gospel it was revealed justifying the sinner. And this is the great mystery of the Gospel, that sins are justified not only through the grace and mere compassion and mercy of God, but through Divine justice and righteousness too, that is, through the righteousness of Christ, who is Jehovah, the Lord our righteousness.

And the Spirit of Truth when he came, he did reprove and instruct the world concerning these two great articles of faith, wherein the Jews had so mischievously deceived themselves; that is, concerning true saving faith, faith in Christ; and also concerning the manner or formal cause of Justification, viz. the righteousness of Christ.

But then how can we form the Argument? I go unto the Father, therefore the world shall be convinced of my justifying righteousness.

I. Let us consider that the expression, I go unto the Father, hath something more in it than I go to Heaven. So that by this kind of phrase our Savior seems to hint, That work being now finished, for the doing of which my Father sent me into the world, I am now returning to him again. Now the work which Christ had to do for the Father was various. The manifestation of the Father, Preaching the Gospel, vanquishing the enemies of God, sin, death and the Devil; but the main and chief of all, and upon which all the rest did depend was, that he might perform a perfect obedience, or obediential righteousness to God.

God had created man that he might obey his Maker, which when he did not do, but being led away by the Devil, grew disobedient, where was the Creator's glory? The Devil triumphs that the whole human race in Adam, had kicked against God, proved a rebel, and war'd under the banners of Satan. It was necessary therefore that Christ clothing himself in the human nature, should come into the world, and vindicate the glory of God, by performing an entire obedience due from mankind, and worthy of his Maker. He did what weighed down for all the disobedience of all mankind, I may say of the Devils too, for his obedience was infinite. He fulfilled a righteousness by which sinners might be justified, which answered that justice that would have condemned them, for the righteousness was infinite. This was the great business he had to do in this world to pay such an obedience, and to fulfill such a righteousness; and this righteousness is the principal and noble theme and subject of the Evangelical Doctrine, Rom. I. 17. of this the world must primarily, and of necessity be convinced and instructed to the glory of him that justifieth, and the declaration of the true Doctrine of Justification. And this rightequsness of his was abundantly evidenced by his going to the Father, because he could not have been received there, if he had not fully accomplisht that work for which he had been sent.

II. It is added, not without reason, and ye see me no more; i. e. Although you are my nearest and dearest friends, yet you shall no more enjoy my presence on earth; by which may be evinced that you shall partake of my merits; especially when the world shall see you enriched so gloriously with the gifts of my Spirit.

VERS. II.

IT is well known that the Prince of this world was judged, when our Savior overcame him by the obedience of his death, Heb. II. 14. and the first instance of that judgment and victory was when he arose from the dead; the next was when he loos'd the Gentiles out of the chains and bondage of Satan by the Gospel, and bound him himself, Revel. XX. 1, 2. which place will be a very good Comment upon this passage.

And both do plainly enough evince, that Christ will be capable of judging the whole world, viz. all those that believe not on him, when he hath already judged the Prince of this world. This may call to mind the Jewish opinion concerning the judgment that should be exercised under the Messiah, that he should not judge Israel at all, but the Gentiles only; nay that the Jews were themselves rather to judge the Gentiles than that they were to be judged. But he that hath judged the Prince of this world, the author of all unbelief, will also judge every unbeliever too.

VERS. XII.

THOSE things which he had to say and they could not bear yet, were the institution of the Christian Sabbath, and the abolishing of the Jewish (the reason and foundation of which, viz. his Resurrection they yet understood not) the rejection of the Jewish Nation, when they expected that the Kingdom should be restored to Israel, Act. I. 6. The entire change of the whole Mosaic dispensation, and the bringing in of all Nations in common, within the pale of the Church: These and such like things as these belonging to the Kingdom of God, Act. I. 3. they could not yet bear. For though he had plainly enough discoursed to them the destruction of Jerusalem, Mat. XXIV. yet is it a question whether they apprehended either that their whole Nation must be utterly cast off, or that the rites of Moses should be antiquated, although he had hinted something of this nature to them more than once.

VERS. XIII.

AND ver. 14. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , He shall receive of mine. He speaks according to the Dialect and custom of the Nation, and so to the capacity of his auditors: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 If they have heard they teach . It is spoken of a Judge in the lower Sanhedrin, consulting a higher Court, first that of the Triumvir, and if they hear they teach; if not, then he goes to the supreme Court of all.

The latter clause, he shall receive of mine, seems taken from Isa. XI. 2. especially if the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 be the same with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ; but if our Savior expressed the sense of that word by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , he did in that also follow the familiar manner of speaking, known amongst the vulgar, and it should seem he inclined rather to this sense, because he does not say, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , He shall receive of mine and give; but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , He shall receive and show it unto you; by which the Jew would understand 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 He shall receive of my Doctrine, or from my instructions. For the Holy Spirit is sent as an instructor from the Son, as the Son is sent as a Redeemer from the Father.

VERS. XVI.

A Little while and ye shall not see me, because I go to the Father, and ye shall see me, because I go to the Father, i. e. Ye shall not see me personally, but virtually. It is true they did not see him when he lay in the grave, and they did see him when he rose again; but I question whether these words ought to be taken in this sense, because it would sound somewhat harshly here what is added, Ye shall see me because I go unto the Father. I would therefore rather understand it of his ascending into Heaven, after which they saw him indeed no more personally, but they did see him in the influences and gift of his Holy Spirit; and so what follows agrees well enough with this sense of the words, ver. 23. In that day ye shall ask me nothing, [as ye were now about to inquire of me, ver. 19.] Ask the Father in my name, and he shall reveal to you whatever you shall ask of him.

VERS. XXIV.

UNderstand this clause of the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit, and then all things will be easy. All the faithful did pray in the name of the Messiah; and these Disciples acknowledging Jesus to be the Messiah, did pray in the name of Jesus the Messiah. But hitherto they had asked nothing extraordinary in his name, not the power of working miracles, not the revelation of Mysteries, and of future things, not the spirit of Prophesy, &c. for it was not necessary for them as yet to ask these things in his name, whiles he was present with them, who could dispense it to them according to their instant necessities: But for the future when himself should be gone from them, whatsoever they should ask the Father in his name he would give it them. That prayer of the Apostles, Act. IV. 29, 30. is a good Comment upon these words. Ask such things as these in my name, and whatsoever you ask you shall receive, that your joy may be full, when you shall find by experience that I am still present with when gone from you.

Those things which both here and elsewhere in the discourses of our Savior might give occasion for Scholastical discussion, I leave wholly to the Schools, omitting many passages, about which a great deal might be said, because they have been already the labors of other Pens. It was my design and undertaking, only to note some things which were not obvious, and which others had not yet taken notice of; and not forgetting the title of this little work (being Horae Hebraicae & Talmudicae ) I have the more sparingly run out into Scholastic or Theological disputes.

VERS. I.

THERE is a question among Expositors about the article in the Plural number 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , and the accent in 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ; and that upon this occasion, that it might not be thought as if any relation were to be had here to Cedars, wherein one hath been deceived when he thus comments upon it: It is called the brook Cedron, that is, of Cedars that grow there. So also the Arab. Interp. in this place, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 over the brook of Cedar. But in 2 Sam. XV. 23. and 1 King. II. 37. he retains the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Cedron.

Amongst the Talmudists 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Kedar, signifies dung , 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 where the Gloss renders 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Kedar by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the easing of nature. Aruch render it by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 dung; and the sense of that clause is, more die of inconvenient easing nature, than of hunger. I would not affirm that the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 was used in this sense in the Primitive denomination of the brook Kidron, but rather that the brook was called so from blackness; the waters being blacken'd by the mud and dirt that ran into it, it being indeed rather the sink or common sewer of the City than a brook.

But when the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 was used for dung, which it might be at that time when the Greek Version was made, perhaps those Interpreters might translate the Hebrew word into Greek, which is not unusual with them, so that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , might be the same with them as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the brook of filth.

The Grandees of the Nation had their Gardens and places of pleasure about the City, yea even in the mount of Olives, for there were none within the City its self . The blood that was over and above, after the sprinkling of the inward Altar, was poured out toward the foundation on the west of the outward Altar. And the blood that was over and above at the outward Altar was poured out at the foot of it on the South-side, and both the one and the other meeting together ran down through a conveyance under ground into the brook Kidron. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And was sold to the Gardeners to dung their Gardens with, which having bought they used for that purpose .

For the blood having been once dedicated to sacred use, might not be put to any common use without trespass, so that the Gardeners paid so much money for it as would purchase a trespass-offering.

VERS. III.

THE Talm. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 now what 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 should signify, we may make a guess out of Succah , They danced [that is, in the Feast of Tabernacles] holding in their hand 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 burning Torches. The Gloss is, They threw up their Torches into the air, and caught them again in their hands; and some there were so great artists in this exercise, they could do it, some with four, others with eight Torches at once, throwing up one, and catching another.

VERS. X.

A Name very much in use amongst the Jews, Malluch, Nehem. X. 4, 27. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Malchus the Arabian. This was also the name of that implacable enemy to Christianity, Porphyrius, and of his father before him. So Luke Holsteine in the life of Porphyrius, where he reckons up more of that name.

Christ had stroke those to the ground that came to apprehend him by the power of his Word that he might thereby provide for the flight of his Disciples, and show his own Divine power; they getting up again accost him, Judas kisseth him, they lay hands upon him, and then Peter draws his sword, &c.

VERS. XIII.

FOR Annas was Father-in-law to Caiaphas, as also 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the Sagan of the Priests, Luk. III. 2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Targ. in 2 King. XXIII. 4. Now Sagan was the same with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the Prefect or Ruler, which we have so frequent mention of amongst the Rabbins.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Ruler saith unto them. Gloss. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Ruler is the Sagan . 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Sagan is the same with Ruler.

There is frequent mention amongst the Talmudists of R. Ananias 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the Sagan of the Priests : He was destroyed with Rabban Simeon, and Ishmael, at the siege of Jerusalem . But I am apt to think he was that sharp and unjust Judge that St. Paul had to do with Act. XXIII. rather than our Annas in this place.

Why they should carry our Savior when they had taken him before Annas the Sagan, sooner than to Caiaphas the High Priest, the Evangelist gives us one reason, viz. because he was Father-in-law to Caiaphas; under which another reason may be deduced, viz. that he was the older man, of greater experience and skill in the Law; for there were sometimes some High Priests that were very unlearned fellows, as may be gathered from that supposition in Joma , If the High Priest be a wise man, he expounds, if not they expound to him. If he be accustomed to reading, he reads himself, if not, they read before him.

But for the Sagan of the Priests it was very necessary he should be a man of learning, because his charge was about the things and service of the Temple, and was bound to be always assistant and present there, when the High Priest was seldom there, or conversed in those affairs.

Juchasin and Aruch, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 No one could by right be promoted to the High Priesthood, unless he had first been Sagan. A good cautelous provision indeed, that so in the time of their Saganship they might gain experience in the Laws and Rituals, and might be the better fitted for the High Priests Chair. But when it came to that pass that persons were made High Priests for their money, and not for their deserts, it might easily happen that very unlearned wretches might sometimes possess that seat. And perhaps Caiaphas himself was of this stamp.

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.

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.