OF PRINCETON
THFOI QGICAI SEMINARY.
NOTES
ON
SCRIPTURE.
Br
JOEL JONES, LL.D.
r
LIBRARY OF PRINCETON
NOV 1 • 2007
THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY
PHILADELPHIA:
WILLIAM S. & ALFRED MARTIEN,
No. 606 Chestnut Street.
1861.
Entered, according to act of Congress, in the year 1860, by
WILLIAM S. & ALFRED MARTIEN,
In the Office of the Clerk of the District Court for the Eastern
District of Pennsylvania.
TABLE OF CONTENTS.
CHAPTER I.
Table of the genealogy of Jesus. Omission of names in the table of pedigree.
Addition of title of King to David, and omission of the title to Solomon, sig-
nificant. Omission of Matthew to make mention of the return of the tribes
from captivity. Necessary change of phraseology — Emmanuel. Christ as
truly the son of Joseph as of David or Abraham. Manner and occasion of the
revelation made to Joseph. Testimony of Herod. Form of government ap-
pointed for the tribes of Israel and for the land God gave them. Natural
means of escape or protection, preferred to miraculous, in the passing of the
Lord Jesus from infancy to manhood. The massacre of the children of Beth-
lehem by Herod, a renewed cause for the lamentation of the mother of the
ten tribes retrosjjectively spoken of by Jeremiah xxxi. 15. Pages 33 — 51
CHAPTER 11.
John's character and ministry, why called the Baptist. Difference between the
opinions of the early Christian writers and those of the last two centuries on
the prophecy Mai. iv. 5. John not Elias in person — John equal to Elijah —
The Elijah of the legal economy — John the subject of prophecy as well as
Elijah, but not of the same prophecies — Both to be sent to a people dwelling
together in the land of Israel. Distinction between the miraculous passage
through the Eed Sea by Moses and the miraculous passage through the Jor-
dan by Joshua. Significancy of the place where John baptized. John's
object — his baptism ineffectual to restore national repentance. Momentous
events to occur between John's baptism with water and the baptism of the
nation with the Holy Ghost and with fire — John's baptism emblematical.
The baptism of the Holy Spirit — our Lord's promise of baptism to his Apos-
tles at his last interview does not include a baptism with fire. Baptism by
fire. Baptism of Christ. The purpose of John's ministry declared by the
angel. Intimate connection between the national salvation of Israel and the
purpose of redemption. John preaches repentance — his eminence above
others — Wherein his preaching differed from the Apostles — Important pas-
sages touching the character and offices of John. The question of the Phari-
sees respecting John's office and authority. The question of the Priests
and Levites respecting his baptism — His answer. John performed no mira-
cles— Object of Christ's miracles. John's imprisonment — Suggestions as to
the purpose for which John's imprisonment was so long continued. Com-
mencement of Christ's ministry. Importance of considering Christ's personal
ministry to the Jews under three distinct heads. Classification of miracles.
Christ's Sermon on the Mount. The burden of the prophets. Christ's ful-
filling the law — His restoration of all things. Christ's prohibition of oaths —
Judicial oaths. The Lord's prayer. Miracles as a proof of the presence of
the kingdom — Miracles for the purpose of proving the power of faith in the
scheme of redem]3tion — Healing the leper — The office of faith in miracles —
Faith. Healing the Centurion's servant. Miracles in answer to faith — Diver-
sities of the operations of faith — Typical import of these bodily cures. Christ's
bearing our infirmities — Matthew's numerous quotations from the Old Testa-
ment Scriptures. Christ's title — The Son of Man. Miracles as the Son of
12 CONTEXTS.
Man — Title as 'Son of Man* more comprehensive than his title of Messiah —
evidence of hi# claim to each distinct and ditlerent. and exhibited to ditVerent
witnesses and for ditlerent pur jMses — Pivmise of power to the disciples.
Mysteries of Jestis' nature. Jesus" pi^wer over the physical world. The
miracle of casting out demons au exercise of the Lord's jx^wer as Son of
Man over the spiritual world — A reason for assigning miracles of this cha-
racter to our Lt^rd's Adamic otVice — Combination of miracles, for what pur-
pose. Jesus' ix)wer over evil spirits. .... Pages 51 — 92
CHAPTER III.
Sins forgiven on account of the faith of synipathiging friends. EfTeet of the
sublimity of our Lord's character and dejH>rtment. " The prerogative which
the Saviour claims as " Sou of Man" annexed to his human, not his Divine
nature. The call of Matthew — The Saviour's call always elieotive. Miracles
as examples of the jx^wer of faith. The Gosj^el of Matthew not intended as a
biography of our Loni, or as a connected record of his public ministry. The
coiupassion of Jesus. The harvest tield — The harvest — The time' of the
harvest — The Lord of the harvest. The calling of the Apostles — the jK>wer
conferral on them limited to two kinds of miracles, annexed to their office as
1>reachers of the kingdom. The commission of the Apostles previous to our
..ord's resurrection. The Apostles not authorized expounders of the law.
The Saviour's special care over the Apostles extending to the smallest and
most necessary things. The meaning and intent of the precept •• Let your
jvace," ,ic. Our Lorvl's ministry to the Jews a national visitation. Twelve
Aj^K>stles sent to the cities of Israel. Cities held responsible as communities.
Distinction between the gospel as preached to the Jews under the economy of
law, and the gospel of grace preached to all nations. One commission, two
missions under it. given to the AjK>stles. Keference to the second mission.
The Ai.K>stles' isinorance of the extent to which their service would ultimately
be required, to be removed by the teaching of the Holy Spirit. First promise
(by implication) of the Holy Spirit. Reference to Christ's mission to that
people, as Messiah, ended, and his mission as '• Son of Man," or Saviour of
all who would come unto him, commenced. Sending forth of the twelve —
The subject of their teaching. Chief intent of John's Inquiry of Jesus, by his
disciples, '• Art thou he that should ci^me?" The prophecy respecting Elijah
not applicable to John the Baptist. Exposition, differing from commentators,
who consider the declaration of the Saviour, "'The kingdom of heaven suffer-
eth violence," Ac a rule of Christian life. The power and authoritv of Jesus
as "Son of Man" taught by the Psalmist, also by Paul. Necessity of distin-
guishing Wtween the person, offices, or authority of Jesus, in order to obtain
a clear understanding of his discourses — As "S*.m of Man," he claims absolute
authority over the Sabbath. The jx>wer of Christ's will as Lord of the Sab-
bath exemplilied. First conspiracy against the life of Jesus Christ's observ-
ance of the rules of human prudence^ — Characteristic difterence between the
records of Matthew and Mark. The public demeanour of Jesus in his subject
condition and servant form. The eU'ect of our Lord's miracles upon those who
witnesses! them. Earthly analogies used by our Saviour in reply to the
thoughts of the Pharisees. The absurdity of their calumny exposed. The
Pharisees thn.iwn into a dilemma. The kingdom of Gotl (proved Dy his pre-
sence) in the midst of that jx^pleas a nation— Satan's kingdom real'as proved
by the aivusation of the Pharisees and the response oT the Saviour. An
allegory n^preseuting the jviwer of the usurper and the Lordship of Jesus.
Contrast Unween sins against the Holy Spirit and sins against the Son of Man.
A call ujx^u his calumniators for cv'insistency. Scribes and Pharisees demand
no further signs — The evidence already furuishe^i sulKcient for the trial of the
nation — Evidentvs of his Divine character given in private to his disciples,
which were withheld fn>m the nation at large. A prophetic allegorv. especially
applicable to the Jews, shadowing forth their future character and moral con-
dition. A contrast tacitly drawn by our Saviour, between mankind as fallen,
and man as re^iivmevl. Division of parables into public and private instruc-
tion— Im{xirtance of the distinction between our Loni's public functions as a
minister of the circumcision, and his private functions as a teacher of disciples.
Christ's private instructions to his disciples contain the germ of all the great
doctrines of the Epistles. Instruction on the parable of" the sower. An alle-
CONTENTS. 13
gorieal representation of the state of the world between the first and second
advent of the Son of Man. The sublime conception enveloped in the parable
of the Uires of the field, made apparent by the Saviours explanation — The
central idea of the parable. Private instruction to the Aix>stles (specially
intended) showing the result of their laKnirs. A similitude of the teachei^
the Lord designee! to raise up and instruct in the nivsteries of the kingdom of
heaven. Distinction between the Saviour's miracles. . Pases ^2 — 132
CHAPTER IV.
Herod the Tetrarch's testimonv to the truth and reality of the miraculous works
of Jesus — The conclusion of the argumentative part of the (josjvI of Matthew.
Imprisonment of John the event u}xin which our Lords public ministry
was suspended. John's influence. The first seal put upon the nation's doom.
Time ot John's death — Term of his ministry — The connection between the
personal ministry of John and the personal ministry of Jesus — Change in our
Lord's public and private discourses and miracles, consequent on the death of
John. The Saviour's design to make a new revelation of his character to the
disciples and the multitude. The first miracle performed after the death of
John the Riptist — This miracle an exercise of his Adamic power as Son of
Man — Our Lord's argument deduced fron this miracle. Another exercise of
our Lx>rd's Adamic ^x>wer belonging to his category of private instruction —
The natural side ot our Loral's character really the miraculous side — The
miraculous side, but the natural outward actings of his glorious humanitv.
Peters recognition of his Lord. The jx)wer of peVfect faith. Perfect faith in
Jesus, a power by divine constitution, superior to physical laws — One of the
purposes of redemption, a construction of a new orderof manhood bv a gene-
alogy derived from the second Adam. Two other miracles of po'wer%ver
nature silently wrought. 'Worship olfered to our Lord. The Divine purpose
as to the ultimate condition of this world. An illustration of the [>ower of
faith disconnected with the public purposes of Christ's ministrv. Object of
our Lord in the performance of the miracles near the sea of Galilee, The trial
of the nation virtually close<.l— Our Lord's ministrv personal. The dulness of
the disciples— The import of the miracle of the loaves. The mvsterv of John
the Baptist's person — The mystery of our Lord's person. Peter's acknowledg-
ment of the incarnation of God the Son ia Christ. The first disclosure of the
mystery of the Lords person by the Father to one of his disciples. The
foundation of the Church. Mistakes and corrections. Our Lord's injunction
to secresy respecting his title of Christ — His names, Jesus and Christ. Our
Lords method in the instruction of his disciples. Another example of Peter's
rashness — our Lord's rebuke. Peter's mistake and ignorance of all the mys-
teries of redemption, except the incarnation. The value of the soul. Christ's
title, the Si^n of Man. The Transfiguration. The instruction conveved bv
the Transfiguration intended for the Church. . . . Pages 133 — ir'a
CHAPTER V.
The Coming of Elias. Casting out demons. The apostle's want of faith for
miracles. The faith for working miracles. Jesus as Son of Man and as Christ.
Jesus as Son of Man and as Messiah. Christ's Kingdom as Messiah. Christ's
paying tribute. The apostles' question. 'Who shairbe greatest in the kingdom
of heaven?— the reply of our Lord. Little children saved. The Son of^Man
come to save the lost. Contending brethren to be reconciled. Sense of the
word -church." Binding and loosing. The discipline of the Church. There-
generation. Personal reign of Christ, The new heavens and new earth. The
apostles to sit on thrones. All believers to receive rewards. Christ foretells
his crucifixion Pages 17(>— 227
CHAPTER VI.
Driniing of Christ's cup. The apostles not to be ambitious. The law of the
kingdom. Christ came to serve. Melchizedec the Son of Man. Christ's
entry into Jerusalem. Christ's lamentation over Jerusalem. Christ's expul-
14 CONTENTS.
sion of the money-changers. The homage of the children. The withering of
the barren fig-tree. Christ is questioned by the priests. Christ's response.
Christ's further response. The nation reject him. The parable of the two
sons. The {^arable of the vineyard. The parable of the marriage.
Pages 227—274
CHAPTER VII.
The plot against Christ in regard to tribute. Christ's reply in respect to tribute.
The Sadducees deny the resurrection. Christ's answer respecting the resur-
rection. Resurrection promised in the ancient covenants. The resurrection
promised to the patriarchs. Christ's answer respecting the commandments.
Christ's question respecting his title as Lord. He silences those who questioned
hira. The intimate connection of the several parts of the evangelical record.
The Jews to hear the teachers of the law. Why the teachers of the law were
to be heard. Character of the Scribes and Pharisees. The ambitious to be
humbled, the lowly to be exalted Pages 274 — 300
CHAPTER VIII.
Our Lord's purpose in his address to the Scribes and Pharisees. Our Lord's
purpose in prolonging the authority of the Scribes and Pharisees as teachers.
Christ a sign to the Jews. The woe to the Scribes and Pharisees. A pre-
diction of the issue of the trial of the nation under the dispensation of the
Holy Spirit. The Scribes and Pharisees considered as representatives of the
nation as well as individuals. The ground or cause of the nation's guilt for
crimes committed from the beginning of the world. The apostrophe to Jeru-
salem. Jerusalem and Judea to be desolated. The event upon which the
return of the Divine favour is made. to depend. Destruction of the temple
foretold. Question of the disciples about the temple. Question of the disciples
respecting our Lord's coming. The meaning of the end of the cueev or age. Im-
perfection of the disciples' knowledge — ignorance and misconception of the
Divine purposes. False Christs to arise — a warning to the Jews. The true sign
of the end. Jerusalem's respite, denoted by the second mission of the servants
in the parable of the marriage. Jerusalem's desolation. The distress of the
nations. The advent of the Son of Man. The judgment of the nations.
Christ's kingdom. The Revelation of St. John a symbolical explanation of
the prophecy, or principal parts of it, contained in the 29th 30th and 31st
verses of Matt xxv. The prophecy relates to this world. . Pages 300 — 329
CHAPTER IX.
Crucifixion. First step in the proceeding against our Lord. Evasive answer
of the Jews. Jews' acknowledgment that they were a subject people. Pilate's
cognizance of the case necessary to the fulfilment of the Saviour's prediction
of the manner of his death — Charges against Jesus — Pilate's mind unaflected
by them. Colloquy between Christ and Pilate. Christ not born to be a king,
but a king before he was born. Pilate's public acquittal of the Lord Jesus.
Reiterated charges, with additional circumstances, suggest to Pilate the
dismissal of the case to Herod. Jesus' appearance before Herod. Herod's
questions — Christ's silence. Herod declines jurisdiction. The union of
Pilate and Herod with the people whom they represented, a fulfilment of
the second Psalm Pages 330—354
CHAPTER X.
Pilate resumes the trial of the Lord Jesus. Obliquity of Pilate's moral sense.
Pilate's expedients to satisfy our Lord's accusers. The interruption of Pilate
by the message of his wife. The proposal of Pilate considered as an inti-
mation of wliat passed in the secret councils of the Father, when our fallen
race was set in comparison with his Son. The choice of Barabbas deter-
mined- relations existing between Adam and Barabbas on the one hand,
and the Lord Christ on the other. By the course of Pilate's proceedings,
and the form of his judgment, the Jews demand the crucifixion of their
CONTENTS. 15
King and Messiah. The way to the mystery of the cross prepared by the
imprudence of Pilate, and the crime of the priests and people. Pilate's
attempt to conciliate the passions of envious wicked men with his duty.
The voluntary wickedness of Pilate, and of that generation of the Jews,
was the instrument of Christ's sufferings at that time. Pilate's solemn
acquittal of Jesus — his criminal inconsistency. The imprecation of the Jews.
Pilate's efforts to reconcile the demands of justice and his own conscience
with his fears. Satan the instigator of the bodily sufferings of our Lord —
An exhibition of the love of God, and of the Son, and of the severity of divine
justice. The crime of the Gentiles. Second mockery of the royalty of Jesus.
Jesus crowned with the emblem or symbol of the curse. Fulfilment of
Isaiah 1. 6. Pilate's further attestation to Jesus' innocence. Pilate's presen-
tation to the people of the true Messiah they had so long expected. The
priests fear the effect of the appearance of Jesus on the people. Every
pretext to future calumnies removed by Pilate's reiteration of the innocence
of Jesus. The Jews endeavour to remove the scruples of Pilate by a new
accusation — The grounds of the accusation examined — The foundation of the
doctrine of the Trinity firmly laid in the Old Testament. The effect of this
new accusation on Pilate. Pilate's inquiry into the origin of the Lord Jesus.
Jesus' silence. Pilate's confession removes all excuse for his conduct. Jesus
instructs Pilate upon the point of his (Pilate's) authority, inasmuch as he
claimed a power independent of the providential government of God. Satan
the chief actor in this great conflict. The death of the Lord on the cross by
means of Judas, Jews and Gentiles, foretold by the words, "Thou shalt bruise
his heel." Pilate given over to the invisible power of Satan. Jews' incon-
sistency. Formal presentation of their King to the Jews. Their renunciation
of him, and all the promises made to Abraham and David. God's judgments
upon them. The Jews living witnesses of the divine mission of our Lord.
End of the proceeding before Pilate — fulfilment of Isaiah liii. 8, Jews and
Gentiles concur in the accomplishment of the mystery of redemption. Judas'
repentance not genuine — his destruction a direct act of Satan's power.
Irregular workings of conscience in depraved men. Perpetuation of Judas'
and the priests' crime. Discrepancy accounted for. Leading the Saviour out
of the city more than a compliance with Roman or Jewish customs. Christ
bearing his cross. An allegorical intimation of the future call of the Gentiles,
according to some of the early Christian writers. Mutability of popular
feeling. Jesus' warning to those who bewailed him. National ruin of the
Jews and its continuance. Similarity between the language of our Saviour
and that of Hosea, when predicting the fall of Samaria, and also with that
of John, when opening the sixth vial. The hopelessness of the escape of the
heir of the curse, except in the way of God's own appointment.
Pages 354—403.
CHAPTER XL
Fulfilment of Isaiah liii. 12. Tradition prevailing extensively in the early
Christian Church. Different statements of the Evangelist reconciled.
Divine simplicity of the statement of the Evangelists. An additional proof
of Christ's divine mission. Christ's cross converted into a tribunal. The
Saviour's prayer. Sins against the Son of Man. Sin against the Holy
Ghost. Discrepancy (not affecting the substance of the writing) accounted
for. Testimony of the Judge and Governor of the Jews as the murderer of
their own Messiah. Pilate's peremptory refusal to alter the superscription.
Christ's self-humiliation. The seamless coat typical of that perfected body of
believers which our blessed Lord will at his coming gather to himself. Neces-
sity for actual ocular witnesses of the death of Jesus. Seeming discrepancy
between Mark xv. 25, and John xix. 14, reconciled. The proof demanded by
the rulers inconsistent with the object of Christ's mission. Conduct of the sol-
diers. The proof demanded by the chief priests and scribes not adapted to
change the heart. Omissions of the Evangelists. The malefactor's rebuke —
his repentance, faith, and prayer, a wonderful exhibition of the power and
grace of Christ in his greatest humiliation — his testimony to the innocence
of our Lord Jesus of a much higher order than Pilate's. "The penitent male-
factor more fully instructed in the mystery of redemption, while hanging on
the cross, than Peter, John, or the other disciples were at that time — Jesus'
gracious promise — The consciousness of the soul in its state of separation from
16 CONTENTS.
the body. The company of friends around or near the cross. Existence of
natural affection in the future state. The exfiliation of Jesus and the substi-
tution of John, an official act. Proofs and signs of his Messiahship (now the
Jews' probation as a nation was ended.) The abandonment of the Father, an
indispensable part of the plan of redemption. Misunderstanding of the by-
standers. One other prophecy to be fulfilled. Fulfilment of Psalm Ixix. 21,
Erroneous belief of the by-standers. All things accomplished necessary for
the perfecting of the new creation. Voluntary separation of Christ's spirit
from his body by his own inherent power— Eetention of his spirit up to the
time when the Paschal Lamb ought to have been slain — A fulfilment of the
type. Symbolical import of Matt, xxvii. 51 — 5.3; Luke xxiii. 45. Public dis-
plays of the Divine power — A new dispensation — Risen saints. Impressive-
ness of the last scene — Testimony of heathens to the excellency of our
Lord's character. Eftect of the last scene upon those attracted by curiosity —
Love a more powerful principle than fear, illustrated by the group of females
in the distance. Fulfilment of Ps. xxxiv. 20; Exod. xii.46: Numb. ix. 10; and
also a partial fulfilment of Zech. xii. 10. The death of Jesus established
beyond the possibility of doubt. The request of Joseph of Arimathea. Pro-
vidential arrangements for the accomplishment of Divine purposes. Nicode-
mus's care of the body of our Lord. Sense of the Psalmist xvi. 10. Jewish
mode of burial. An over-ruling providence in the selection of the place of
the buriaL Precaution taken by the disciples to secure the entrance into the
sepulchre. Observance of the law of the Sabbath by the Jewish females, fol-
lowers of Jesus. Disregard of their own law of the Sabbath by the chief
priests and the Pharisees. The evidence of our Lord's resurrection by Divine
power placed beyond all doubt or question. . . . Pages 403 — 146
CHAPTER XII.
A short harmony of the chapters to be considered. The doctrine of the resur-
rection equal in importance to any other in the Scriptures — absolutely essen-
tial to the truth and consistency of the other Scriptures. First and second
incarnation— the headship of Christ as the second Adam — the whole doctrine
of the glorified church inseparably connected with the doctrine of our Lord's
resurrection. The Marys at the sepulchre. The absence of all that can
minister to vain curiosity an unequivocal note of the inspiration of the record
— the descent of the angel, the earthquake, the removal of the stone not
necessary to the resurrection of Jesus, but a proof to the watch, and through
them to the nation, of the presence and power of God, in bringing to nought
their precaution. The address of the angel to the company of females at the
sepulchre. The message with which the angel charged the woman— Inter-
course between angels, the Saviour, and his disciples. The flight of the first
party of females from the sepulchre — Difficulty in harmonizing this part of
the Evangelist's record removed. Reproof of the angels to the females for their
unbelief. Providential design in these successive companies of persons, mul-
tiplying proofs, and more quickly and widely circulating the news. Impres-
sion Mary Magdalen's communication made on the minds of Peter and John.
John's timidity. Consistency of the narrative with the known character of
these apostles. Efiect on John's mind of his visit to the sepulchre. Ministry
of angels in the present dispensation. Question of the angels — Mary's igno-
rance other Lord's character, and of the real object and end of his ministry —
Cause of Mary's composure, so diflferent from the manner of the company who
fled affrighted from the sepulchre. Mary's view of Jesus, though unknown
to her. 'The Saviour's question put as a proof to Mary of his bodily presence.
Spiritual natures. Mary's recognition of her Lord, through his power over
her mind and spirit — This power, an attribute with which he will endow the
renewed nature of all his people, when they shall be changed into his like-
ness. Christ's prohibition of Mary's touch explained by taking the passage
in its literal sense — Christ prefigured by the High Priest, under the Levitical
economy — the type to be fulfilled in all points — Distinction conferred on Mary
Magdalene. Jesns in his future interviews with his disciples no longer to be
considered as an inhabitant of the earth, but as having completed his earthly
ministry, as the rending of the veil" denoted the end of the Levitical economy.
Character of the narrative. Occurrences at the sepulchre communicated to
the Apostles by the womeu. Peter's second visit to the sepulchre. Diflference
CONTENTS.
17
between the fee ings of the women and the Apostles on Jesus' anpearanoe to
them-Difierent messages to his disciples by the two com an S^of women
Chrnts risen body not confined to the earth during treXrdays-S^
qua e conception of the attributes of our Lord's risen humarbody The vfsit
of the military guard to Annas and Caiaphas. The Sanhedrim convenid
?romisTr::^e'S"from'if"" '"^.^^^'^1 *^^ "^^^^^^ ^^ "^^ SaXedH:^
Pages 446— 4'JO
CHAPTER XIII.
Walk to Emmaus— Low views of the two disciples of the d\
■^[xcov 6 iv TocQ ohpavocc;. In the original Greek, as well as
in^ the Latin Vulgate, we find the plural heavens, which our
critics, with general, if not one consent, consider a Hebraism.
It is suggested, however, that the plural is here used with the
design to convey an allusion to the omnipresence of the Father.
By heavens we are to understand the whole creation. Gen. i. 1,
the universal system of suns and planets established in their
orders, in illimitable space ; and we address the Father as filling
them all by his presence, and, of course, as present with us.
These form the Father's {ocxia John xiv. 2,) house or dwelling
place. See Camerarius and Theophylact on John xiv. 2.
The same allusion is conveyed in Heb. iii. 4, " Every house is
builded by some one, but he that built all things" — all worlds,
as a house or dwelling place for himself — "is God." The same
designation or description of the Father, occurs frequently in the
Gospel of Matthew, see v. 16, 45, 48; vi. 1, 9; vii. 11, 21; x.
32, 33; xii. 50; xviii. 10, and always with evident allusion to
the same Divine attribute. The word is also used by him in
the singular, see vi. 10, 20, when no such reference is intended,
or where the limited nature of the subject forbids the plural
THE EARTH AS A DWELLING-PLACE. 79
sense. To call such expressions Ilehraisms does not signify
much. The Jew might with equal propriety call our form (in
the singular) a Gentilism. The question is, which form of
expression is best adapted to the nature of the- subject, and
most accurately sets forth the idea intended to be signified?
If it should be said that the ancient Hebrews had no adequate
or correct idea of astronomy, it may be conceded. But the
■words of Scripture were all dictated by the Holy Spirit, and
the words under consideration were uttered by him who made
all things, and certainly had no need of the teachings of human
wisdom or science.
Matt. VI. 10. "Thy kingdom come; thy will be done on
earth as it is in heaven."
These petitions are very comprehensive. They imply much
more than most who repeat them suppose. At the time they
were dictated they implied the sufferings and death of Christ,
his resurrection and ascension to glory: for these were the
divinely appointed means for restoring the kingdom of God to
this earth. They still imply the filling up and completion
of his elect church and the second coming of the Lord to de-
stroy the man of sin and purge the earth of its abominations.
But, what we wish especially to remark, they are conclusive
evidence of God's determinate purpose and counsel. The
Saviour certainly would not not have dictated petitions for
things which the Father had not designed to accomplish, or
rather had designed never to accomplish. See Acts xv. 18.
We conclude then, from this prayer, that the curse of God
shall be removed from the earth. The creature — physical
nature, all the irrational tribes, as well as man — shall be
delivered from the bondage of the curse, the kingdom of Satan
be destroyed, and mankind, as inhabitants of this earth, will
be restored to perfect holiness and communion with God.
Less than these cannot give reality to these petitions. We
learn from them also the largeness, the perfection, and the
glory of the Saviour's work. What orb in the universe will be
more glorious than this, when these petitions shall be fully
granted? Will He then, afterwards, annihilate or utterly
destroy it with another curse? Mai. iv. 6. Why this, rather
than any other, in which his will is done as perfectly as in
heaven, where his throne is? This petition, then, proves also
the perpetuity of the earth as a dwelling-place for man. Matt.
V. 5, Ps. cxv. 16.
Matt. viii. 2, 3. " And behold a leper came and worshipped
him, saying. Lord, if thou wilt, thou canst make rac clean.
And Jesus put forth his hand and touched him, saying, I will :
Be thou clean."
80 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
The miracles mentioned in chap. iv. 23, appear to have been
wrought by the Saviour of his own accord, without having been
asked to perform 'them. See John v. 7, 13, 14. The imme-
diate and necessary effect of them was, to spread his fame,
and induce others from far and near to bring their sick to him
for cure, iv. 24. No mention, however, is made of the faith
of those whom he healed, nor do we suppose it was demanded
ifi all cases as a prerequisite. They were the appointed
proofs of the presence {7ia[)ooaca) of the kingdom which the
Lord preached, see Matt. xi. 4, 6, John xv. 24, and they are
mentioned in almost immediate connection with his proclama-
tion. It was necessary that the proofs should be exhibited,
irrespectively of the faith or worthiness of those who received
the benefit of them, John ii. 3; v. 4 — 8, Luke vii. 11 — 15,
and in many instances, no doubt, were so. It was with this
view, as we suppose, the Evangelist mentioned, in general
terms, the miracles of the Lord, in the place just referred to.
In this chapter he resumes the subject of miracles, not merely
as a proof of the presence of the kingdom, but for the further
purpose of proving the power of faith in the scheme of redemp-
tion. The observation is also important, as showing the
method or plan of the Evangelist. See note on Matt. i. 1.
The miracle recorded in these verses was not publicly per-
formed, nor was it intended as a public proof to the people ;
for the leper was commanded not to tell it to any man. The
motive of it was mercy to the leper, and the means or medium
of it was the leper's faith. See ix. 23 — 29. This is a new
topic, and it is proper in this place to suggest some consider-
ations, which are applicable to all such cases.
The effects of faith, in the theological sense, are wholly of a
spiritual nature. They are to be sought for in the soul of him
who exercises it. This limitation of the power of faith is a
natural consequence of the cessation of miracles; for the out-
ward visible, or rather physical effects of faith, are no longer, or
at most very seldom, seen. Yet this is a very imperfect repre-
sentation of the power of faith, and of the ends which it is
designed to serve in the world of redemption. The miracles of
healing wrought through faith, are so many examples of its
physical or outward effects upon the bodies of men, and the
Lord repeatedly ascribes to faith a power over material nature,
Matt. xvii. 20; xxi. 21; Mark xi. 22, 23; Luke xvii. 6; see
1 Cor. xiii. 2; Heb. xi. 29, 30. . It is in fact the power, or,
what amounts to the same thing, the established medium for
the transmission of Divine power, in the renovation of the whole
nature of man, of his body, as well as of his soul. By faith
Enoch was translated, that he should not see death, Heb. xi. 5,
THE OFFICE OF FAITH IN MIRACLES. 81
and by their faith the bodies of those of the Lord's people who
shall be alive at his coming, will be changed into conformity
with his glorious body, and be caught up to meet him. 1 Cor.
XV. 51; Philip, iii. 21; 1 Thess. iv. 17. By faith (we mean by
the term, an abiding and implicit, confidence in, and reliance
upon the Saviour) will the souls of departed saints be invested
with bodies of glory and power by the Holy Spirit in their
completed regeneration at the day of the Lord's coming; (see
foot-note on Acts ii. 47 ;) and by the same means will tbeir
union to him, as their Head, be for ever maintained. Thus
considered, faith, or that principle [affectio animce) which has
been described, (call it confidence, reliance upon, or trust in
Christ, for all the soul hopes for or desires, as the reader
pleases,) is a principle or law, or an established medium for the
transmission or action of Divine power in the work and world of
redemption, as really so as what we call gravitation is an estab-
lished law, or rule of action in the universe of material nature;
and one lesson these miracles of healing were designed to incul-
cate is, that as the bodily infirmities and sicknesses of men
were cured through their faith in Jesus, so by the same means
their bodies of sin and death will be transformed into bodies of
life and immortal glory at the Lord's coming.
It is not an objection to this view of the uses and effects of
faith that its first operation is upon the soul, in which the
work of regeneration begins. In its source, faith is a grace, or
a gift of God — a medium of connection between the soul and
God, through Christ, and a means of spiritual benefit in this
life, even although no other should be received. These, how-
ever, are its elementary uses or benefits. Its full power, as a
law, will be developed only in the world of redemption, when
the glorified saint, having been made one Avith Christ, by the
power of the Holy Spirit working through this medium or
means, will find that not one jot or tittle shall fail, of all the
Lord has said concerning the power of faith. Matt. xvii. 20;
xxi. 21; Mark xi. 22, 23.
Erasmus regarded this miracle as teaching, by a figure, from
whence, and by what faith, those diseased with the leprosy of
soul should seek a remedy.* But the typical import, as we
conceive, respects the body, and that perfect cure or relief
from mortality and sin which it shall receive from the Lord,
through faith at his coming. It yields the lesson Erasmus
derived from it, but its typical import is prophetical of other
and greater things.
* Tj'po quodam docturus eos, qui lepra, laborarent animorum, uude et (|via
fide deberent remedium petere." Paraplirasis in loco.
11
82 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
Matt. viii. 5 — 13. "And when Jesus was entered Into
Capernaum, there came unto him a centurion, beseeching him,
and saying, Lord, my servant lieth at home sick of the palsy,
grievously tormented. And Jesus said unto him, I will come and
heal him. The centurion answered and said, Lord, I am not
worthy that thou shouldst come under my roof; but speak the
word only, and my servant shall be healed. For I am a man
under authority, having soldiers under me: and I say to this
man. Go, andhegoeth; and to another, Come, and he cometh;
and to my servant, Do this, and he doeth it. When Jesus heard
it, he marvelled, and said to them that followed, Verily I say
unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel.
And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and
w^est and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob,
in the kingdom of heaven: but the children of the kingdom
shall be cast into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and
gnashing of teeth. And Jesus said unto the centurion, Go thy
way ; and as thou hast believed, so be it done unto thee. And
his servant was healed in the self-same hour." See Luke
vii. 1—10.
The miracle we have just considered was performed on a
Jewish leper, in answer to his own prayer of faith. That
which the Evangelist has recorded in these verses, was wrought
through the faith of a Gentile, not upon himself but upon
another person. The reason for introducing the account of it
in this place, probably was to show a diversity of the operation
of faith, and to furnish another illustration of its power.
It was a favour shown to the centurion, though a stranger to
Israel, in answer to his faith. This is expressly taught. "As
thou hast believed, so be it done unto thee,'' verse 13. We are
not told that the servant exercised faith, or was even conscious
of what his Master was doing in his behalf. In this particular,
it is like that wrought upon the daughter of the Syrophenician
woman. Matt. xv. 22—28; Mark vii. 24—30. These ex-
amples teach, that in the economy of the kingdom, the faith of
one person may be made the means of conveying blessings to
another, who may not be capable of exercising the faith ne-
cessary to receive them. The raising of Jairus's daughter,
Matt. ix. 18; Mark v. 35, 36; Luke viii. 41, 50, is an
eminent example of this power or operation of faith, and of the
diffusiveness of its benefits. James v. 15. This principle is fully
understood and recognized by the Church, in respect to spiritual
blessings. But the typical import of these bodily cures, as
intimated at the end of the last note, suggests another lesson.
In the day of the Lord's coming to receive his living elect,
1 Thess. iv. 11, who can say what numbers will not receive
CHRIST'S BEARING OUR INFIRMITIES. 83
eternal blessings through the fiiith of others? Pious parents,
surrounded by groups of children, see Mark v. 42, -whom they
have dedicated to God by baptism, and for whom they daily
and hourly oflFer the prayer of faith — will these be separated?
the parents taken and their little ones left? Rather will not
the prayer of faith, like that of the centurion, the Syro-
phenician woman, and Jairus, be heard and answered ? Heb.
xi. 7.
The faith of the centurion gave our Lord occasion to refer in
general terms to coming events. His public allusions to the
rejection of the Jews and the calling of the Gentiles, were
comparatively few and indistinct, especially towards the begin-
ning of his ministry. As he was about to close it, some of his
parables very significantly set them forth. See Matt. xxii.
1—10; xxi. 33—44.
Matt. viii. 17. "That it might be fulfilled which was spoken
by Esaias the prophet, saying, Himself took our infirmities, and
bare our sicknesses."
This is a quotation from Isa. liii. 4. The word translated
infirmities is rendered {h.p.apTW.'^) sins by the LXX. and it
appears to have been taken in that sense in 1 Pet. ii. 24. In
the authorized English version of the Old Testament it is
rendered griefs. Grotius was of the opinion that the word
admits both senses. The Evangelist quotes the prophecy in
connection with the miracles of healing which the Saviour
performed upon the sick, and persons possessed with devils,
which he says fulfilled it. If we regard these miracles as
typical of the completed regeneration of man in his body as well
as spiritual nature (see note on verses 2, 3,) we shall have no
difficulty in reconciling either the Septuagint Avith the Gospel,
or the Evangelist with the apostle. The cause or the origin of
the infirmities, griefs, and sicknesses, of which the prophet
speaks, is sin. Without bearing the latter, the Saviour could
not, consistently with the Divine plan, bear the former.
Hence he bore both. In the full and perfect sense he bore
them on the cross, as the apostle Peter expressly alleges, and
by bearing them, he wrought out the work of redemption of
man from sin and all its consequences, moral and physical.
But these miracles of healing were not that perfect work.
They were examples, in a comparatively small way, of that
perfect, thorough work which the Lord will perform upon all
his redeemed ones when he Avill come to receive them to him-
self, and inaugurate his kingdom on earth.*
* The remark of Grotius, though not quite correct, is worthy of being
quoted : Sicut veterum res gesta; reruni, Christi figuram habuerunt, ita et
ipsius Christi actiones alise aliis denotandis iuserviei'unt. Nam beuelicium
84 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
It is "worthy of observation tliat St. Matthew makes more
quotations from the Old Testament Scriptures than either of
the other Evangelists-^a proof, as it is supposed, that he wrote
his Gospel especially for the Jews. The number of quotations
which he makes is thirty-five.
Matt. viii. 20. "• And Jesus saith to him, the foxes have
holes, and the birds of the air nests, [rather shelters. Trench,
148,] but the Son of Man hath not where to lay his head."
The denomination, or title, "Son of Man," which our Lord
here assumes and applies to himself, is taken from Psalm viii. 4.
That this Psalm has respect to the Lord Jesus Christ is proved
by Heb. ii. 8, 9, where it is quoted, and so applied. The
expression occurs very frequently in the Gospels, and frequently
in connection with words which denote also his Divine nature.
See Matt. xxvi. 45 and chap. xxiv. In that divine sense he
was understood by the high priest when questioned as to his
Messiahship. Matt. xxvi. 64, Q^. In his answer he had
allusion, it is probable, to Dan. vii. 13, which may be regarded
as a visionary representation of the future fulfilment of the
eighth Psalm. The frequent use of this description or desig-
nation of our blessed Lord, is designed to inculcate, among
other things, the truth that he was really and truly a man.
This was essential to his priestly, as well as kingly office. Heb.
iv. 14, 15. He says of himself, that the Father hath given
him authority to execute judgment, because he is the Son of
Man, John v. 27; as if his manhood were an indispensable
qualification for the office of a judge over men ; and Paul, in
his address to the Athenians, Acts xvii. 31, refers pointedly to
the manhood of Christ when he says, "God will judge, or
rule, the world in righteousness by that man, (that is, by the
Adam, ben Adam,) whom he hath ordained." See 1 Cor. xv.
45—47.
What our Lord here says of himself, shows the extreme
poverty of his condition as a man ; being less provided for than
the irrational animals. The declaration was well calculated
to discourage the Scribe, if he cherished hopes, as perhaps he
corporihus redditae sanitatis quin figuram remissionis peccatorum et sanatarum
meutium tulerit, dubitari non potest. Bis ergo impletum est vaticiuium,'- &c.
We do not adopt the notion, that this prophecy was twice fulfilled, as Grotius
here supposes, nor that the cures performed on the diseased bodies of the sick,
were figurative of a work wrought, or to he wrought ou the souls of men
merely, as both Erasmus and Grotius appear to have regarded them. The
figure or the tj'pe has respect to the completed work of man's redemption, viz.
to what St. Paul calls the adoption, to wit, the redemption of the body.
Rom. viii. 23; Luke xxi. 28. Compare Luke xxi. 28 with Rom. viii. 19 and
23 in the original: srapaTS Tstc K:-j:tAac:=i:uTi»«pai^cK« ; — uTrcKurpceri; C/u.uv^^thv
Christ's title, son of man. 85
did, of wealth or worldly greatness, from becoming a follower
of the Lord. It does not appear from the narrative that he
actually joined the company of the disciples.
Matt. viii. 23—27. See Mark iv. 39; Luke viii. 22—25.
The miracle recorded in these verses belongs to the fifth
class mentioned in the note to Matt. iv. 23, 24. It was not
performed in the presence of the multitudes, but only before
the disciples who were then with him. It was not therefore
intended as a public proof of his Messiahship, or of the presence
of the kingdom which he preached, but for some end or purpose,
in which at that time his disciples only were concerned. The
same observations may be applied to the miracles recorded in
Luke v. 4—9 ; Matt. xiv. 25—33 ; xvii. 27 ; Mark vi. 47—51 ;
John vi. 17 — 21; xxi. 6. This distinction is important.
Indeed, all the miracles of this class belong to our Lord's
Adamic, rather than to his Messianic character and relations.
Notice the connection. In the 20th verse the Evangelist
records for the first time our Lord's assumption of the title or
character, "Son of Man." He then proceeds almost imme-
diately to the relation of this miracle, leaving us to infer that
it was performed by him in that character. The title is taken
from Psalm viii., and was assumed, no doubt, with reference
to the exalted condition and attributes there ascribed to him.
This conclusion is justified by the application which Paul makes
of this Psalm in Heb. ii. 5—7. If we would get a proper
apprehension of the majesty of the character thus denoted, we
must ponder such passages as Dan. vii. 18 ; Rev. i. 13 ; xiv.
14; 1 Cor. XV. 45; Matt. xxvi. 64; xii. 8; ix. 6; John iii. 13.
Yet in assuming the title, the Lord declared his extreme des-
titution at that time of worldly possessions. 2 Cor. viii. 9. The
miracle removes the apparent discrepancy between what he
said of himself and the universal absolute dominion over
creatures and the works of God, which the Psalmist ascribes
to him in that character. It was a partial unfolding of the
profound mystery of his person; and the recording of the
miracle in this place, is a sort of commentary npon his words,
and we may add (digressively) upon what he afterwards said to
Pilate, John xviii. 36, " My kingdom is not of this world."
See notes on John xviii. 36.
The connection thus developed, is logical, although the con-
necting thought is latent, and must be supplied from the Psalm
from which the title itself is taken. But why, it may be
inquired, were only the disciples permitted to witness miracles
of this kind, Avhile the nation at large had no knowledge of
them, or at least had no ocular evidence of their performance ?
86 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
The reader -will be instructed by pursuing this inquiry for
himself.
The following suggestions may aid him in the investigation,
if they do not resolve the inquiry. " Son of Man," (Ben
Adam) as a title* of the Lord Jesus, denotes his Headship over
the world of redemption, and his federal relations to the innu-
merable hosts of his redeemed people. As Son of Man, he has
a kingdom in which he will hereafter come, of which his
transfiguration was a type or figure. Matt. xvi. 28 to xvii. 9 ;
Mark ix. 1—10; Luke ix. 26—36; Matt. xxvi. 64. It is more
comprehensive than his title of Messiah, which has respect
especially to the throne of David, and his reign over the house
of Jacob, Luke i. 32, 33. Both titles, indeed, concurred in his
person, and the glory of both will be simultaneously manifested
in the same great consummation; yet this specific appellation,
if we may say so, is different, and the evidence of his claim to
each was not only distinct and different, but exhibited to
different witnesses. The nation was concerned to receive him
as the Messiah — the promised son of David ; and to the 7iation
he exhibited such notes or marks of his Messiahship, as the
prophets foretold of him in that character. See Matt. xi. 4 — 6.
His disciples, i. e. his apostles, were to be his heralds in a new
dispensation, the consummation of which was to be the resti-
tution of all things at his coming, as the second Adam, in his
kingdom. It was to qualify them for this service, which was
their real vocation, that they were taught by miracles, by
parables, and in plain language, many things which the multi-
tudes were not permitted to know, see Matt. xiii. 11 ; the
meaning of which was mysterious at the time, but afterwards
unfolded to them by the Holy Spirit.
Such instruction as he thus privately gave them was emi-
nently adapted to qualify them for their office, and inspire
them with resolution to endure the sufferings to which it would
subject them. Matt. xvi. 24 — 28 ; see Heb. xii. 2.
In our Lord's last discourse with his apostles before he
suffered, he assured them, with manifest allusion to these
miracles of his (Adamic) power over physical nature, as well
as to those he publicly performed, that all who believed in him
should do greater works than any he had done before them,
John xiv. 12. And why should he give them such a promise,
except for their conviction and encouragement? To be gifted
with such powers to be employed, in his service, is in itself an
inconceivably great and glorious reward. See Luke xix. 17,
19. For wonderful as these miracles may seem to us, they
were but faint and transient exercises of the power Avhich, as
Son of Man, he really possessed; and although quite sufficient
MYSTERIES OF CHRIST'S NATURE. 87
as proofs of the character lie claimed, they were far below the
works which his redeemed people will be enabled to perform in
his service, through faith in him, in the world of redemption.
In the plainest language he declared that nothing should be
impossible unto them. Matt. xvii. 20; xxi. 20, 21; Luke xvii. 6.
All such promises, however, had respect to the futurity of their
being — to their glorified, and not to their fallen and imperfect
state; for they enjoyed none of them during their earthly
career. 1 Cor. xiii. 2.
These considerations may suffice to show, in general, the use
and intent of this miracle, and the character or relation in
which our Lord performed it. We add a few observations on
some of the particulars.
Matt. viii. 23. " And when he was entered into a ship, his
disciples followed him." Who these disciples were we are not
informed. Probably they were few in number, and those, or
among those, who were afterwards commissioned as apostles.
Matt. viii. 24. "And behold there arose a great tempest
in the sea, insomuch that the ship was covered with the waves."
The Avord {ascanoz) translated tempest, is frequently, if not
usually employed to signify an earthquake. Matt. xxiv. 7, xxvii.
54, xxviii. 2; Mark xiii. 8; Luke xxi. 11; Acts xvi. 26; Rev.
vi. 12, viii. 5, xi. 13, 19, xvi. 18. The word was chosen, per-
haps, to indicate the suddenness of the peril. The sea is about
eighteen miles in length and five or six in breadth. It is sub-
ject to whirlwinds and sudden gusts from the hollows of the
mountains, of short duration but great violence. On this occa-
sion, the gust was so violent that the vessel or boat {xaAu-rscrdai)
was hidden under the waves, and, as we may infer, would
have been submerged, had not Jesus been on board. See John
ix. 3.
"But he was asleep," (sleeping.)
We take these words in their literal import, as we would if
they had been said of one of his disciples, xxvi. 43. In his
fleshly nature, therefore, he was unconscious of the tempest.
How could this be, seeing his human nature was united to the
Divine? We cannot tell. There was, however, an impenetra-
ble mystery about his human person, distinct from the union of
it with the Divine nature. This appears by what he said of
himself to Nicodemus, John iii. 13, "No one hath ascended up
to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son
of Man which is in heaven;" by which we are to understand
(1) that he had ascended to heaven, and (2) that afterwards he
had locally descended, and was at that time come down from
heaven, and yet (3) that he was at that moment also in heaven,
and all as the Son of Man. The distinction of natures does not
88 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
help US here. As man, he ate and drank, Matt. xi. 19, and
slept, as truly as the first man did. Gen. ii. 16, 21. He was at
the same time on earth and in heaven, into which he had
ascended, see Prov. xxx. 4; John vi. 62, and from which he
had come down, and yet he was still there. He was the man of
whom Adam in his unfallen state was only a type. Rom. v. 14.
Matt. viii. 25. "And his disciples came to him and awoke
him, saying. Lord save us: we perish," (we are lost.)
They aroused him (yjeipav) out of sleep to consciousness,
hoping that his extraordinary powers might, in some way, avail
to their deliverance, though their ship or boat should be lost.
Matt. viii. 26. "And he saith to them, Why are ye fearful,
0 ye of little faith!"
The narrative allows us to suppose that the Saviour uttered
these words while yet in his recumbent posture, and while the
danger appeared as imminent as ever. "Why fear ye these
winds and these waves ?^know ye not, have I not told you, that
1 am the Son of Man, to whom the Father hath given absolute
dominion over all the works of his hands, 0 ye of little faith?"
Our Lord in his human nature was susceptible of sorrow,
trouble, weariness, and other sinless human infirmities. Matt.
xxvi. 37, 38, John iv. 6, xi. 33, 35, xiii. 21, but not of fear.
Even before Pilate, when accused by infuriated priests, and
when bearing his cross to Calvary, he felt no fear. As the
Son of Man, all creatures and all the powers of nature were
subject to him as his servants, while he was subject only to God
the Father, 1 Cor. xv. 24 — 27, with whom, in his divine nature
by sonship, he was one. John x. 30. Sorrow, sufiering, pain,
death, he assumed as inseparably incident to his redemptive
work, but not fear. His confidence or faith, as man., in God
was perfect. He was always heard, John xi. 42; and his hold
(if we may so express it) upon Omnipotence, placed him, as a
man, above all created natures and powers. See Matt. xxvi.
53. If the disciples had exercised the same confidence or faith
in him, they would have shared in his exemption from fear, as
well as all causes of fear. John xiv. 1. But they did not, and
hence the rebuke. We infer that the redeemed, being made
perfect by fiiith, will, like their adorable Head, know no fear,
Ps. xlvi. 2, 3; Rom. viii. 38, 39; and the only reason why such
an exemption is not attainable in this life, is the imperfection of
faith. See 1 John iv. 17, 18; Heb. ii. 15.
" Then he arose and rebuked the winds and the sea, and
there was a great calm."
The power he put forth resided, as we suppose, in his human
will, though it was derived from his Divine nature, to which it
was mysteriously united. For there is no power or authority
CHRIST'S POWER OVER NATURE. 89
but of God, Rom. xiii. 1. So will it be with the elect people of
Christ in their glorified state. The wonderful powers with
which they will be invested, will truly reside in their wills, so
far as powers can be supposed to belong to creatures; yet they
Avill be derived through their union to Christ from the infinite
fulness of God in Christ. John xvi. 23; xiv. 12; Matt. xvii. 20;
xxi. 21.
The words of rebuke the Saviour addressed to the winds and
the sea were interpretative of the act he performed, or intended
merely as external evidence to the disciples of the power he
exerted. In this light we are to regard his words to the leper,
Matt. viii. 3, and whatever other external acts accompanied
any of his miracles. See Matt. ix. 6.
Matt. viir. 27. "But the men marvelled, saying, what man-
ner of man is this, that even the winds and the seas obey him!"
This exclamation may remind the reader of the words of
David in 1 Chron. xvii. 17; 2 Sam. vii. 19. See Dr. Kennicott's
and Bishop Horsley's remarks on these verses. The Lord
Jesus, in his human nature, was a style of manhood of which
they had no conception, although the Psalmist had in general
terms described it. Ps. viii. Adam was invested with much
larger powers than any of his descendants ever possessed, but
the world was not then what it became afterwards, when by
transgression he lost those powers. It would be mere specula-
tion to inquire whether Adam could, in his state of innocency,
control at his will the physical energies of material nature; but
from the dominion given him it is reasonable to infer that he
had all the powers necessary to his condition as Lord of the
world. Gen. i. 26. However this may be, such powers as the
disciples had just witnessed, exerted by a man at his will, were
essentially a new thing, at which they might well marvel, even
if they had fully understood the import of the title " Son of
Man."
The word (u-rxxououmu) obey, we need not say, is properly
predicable only of intelligent beings, but in the sense intended
by the disciples it was neither poetical nor figurative. For the
Lord had addressed the winds and the waves as conscious of his
presence and will. The conception was new to them, and this
word was suited (if not the only one they could employ) to
express it.
Matt. viii. 28 — 32. We regard the miracle related in these
verses as belonging to the same class as the last. It was per-
formed in the absence of the multitudes. The keepers of the
swine, the Evangelist is careful to say, were [fiaxfjav) a good
way off, verse 30, and the demoniacs were so fierce that no man
could pass that way, verse 26. Jesus and his disciples, who just
12
90 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
before had witnessed the stilling of the tempest, only were pre-
sent. Yet miracles of this kind were often publicly performed
by our Lord, and he- imparted to his disciples afterwards the
power publicly to perform them. Matt. x. 8 ; Mark vi. 7 ; Luke
ix. 1. Still it was an exercise of the Lord's power as Son of
Man. The miracles, which appropriately belonged to his office
as Messiah, are those enumerated in his answer to the inquiry
of John: "Art thou he that should come, or do we look for
another?" Matt. xi. 3. This form of inquiry plainly referred
to the expected Messiah. The answer virtually referred John
to what Moses and the prophets had written concerning the
Messiah. As if he had said : Go tell John those things which
ye do hear and see. The blind receive their sight and the
lame walk, the lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear, the dead
are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to them.
By these things he may know whether I am he that should
come (6 epj^op.euoi;) or whether this people should look for an-
other. If such be the import of the answer we may infer
that the miracles enumerated were those which properly be-
longed to the office of Messiah, as foretold and described by the
prophets.
It may seem to the reader remarkable, that our Lord should
answer John in this indirect way, and not by a simple affirma-
tive. But a careful perusal of the Gospels will show that he
did not publicly assume the title of Christ during his public
ministry, Matt. xvi. 20; John x. 24, although he did very fre-
quently the title " Son of Man."* The reason will be explained
hereafter. But there is another argument or reason for assign-
ing miracles of this kind to our Lord's Adamic office or charac-
ter, which may be thus stated:
As Son of Man, he was the Man of whom the first Adam was
but a type, Rom. v. 14 ; 1 Cor. xv. 45 — 47, and in this charac-
ter or relation he was the Lord of this world. The conditional
dominion given to the typical Adam was made sure and per-
petual to him, and in this sense we are to understand the
Psalm (viii.) already so often referred to. The power of Satan,
who is often called the god or the prince of this Avorld, John
xii. 31, xiv. 30; Luke xxii. 53; Eph. ii. 2, vi. 12; see Matt,
xii. 29, Luke x. 18, is therefore a usurpation of his rights as
Son of Man; and though as ancient as the first Adam, it
exists only by his sufferance as the rightful Lord and Ruler.
Bearing this in mind, we perceiye that our Lord's incarnation,
* This title occurs 32 times in Matthew, 14 times in Mark, 2G times in
Luke, 11 times in John, and only 4 times in the other parts of the New Testa-
ment, viz. Acts vii. 56, Heb. ii. 6, and Rev. i. 13, xiv. 14. See Schmidt's Gr.
Concordance.
Christ's power over evil spirits. 91
and assumption of this title, was the assumption of his rightful
power as the Adam of promise or covenant, over all the poAver
of the usurping enemy, Luke x. 19, to be exercised to a greater
or less extent at that time, according to the Divine purposes.
John xii. 31 — 33. Upon this fundamental idea the Lord an-
swered the calumny of the Pharisees, when they ascribed his
power over devils to the prince of the devils. Matt. xii. 24 — 29 ;
Luke xi. 15 — 22. By the strong man armed, he denoted the
usurping power of Satan over this world, permitted in conse-
quence of the fall of Adam. By the stronger man, whose
energies needed not to be enforced by arms, he denoted him-
self as the rightful Lord and Proprietor of the world, by Divine
right in his character of Son of Man. Luke xi. 21, 22.
This miracle, then, taken in connection with the one last
mentioned, exemplifies the Saviour's power and authority, as
Son of Man, in two distinct yet equally vast departments of his
government, viz. the physical or material world, and the world
of spirits. The next miracle will furnish an example of his
governmental power as Son of Man over the human race. Matt,
ix. 2 — 6, thus making up the complement of evidence of his
universal and absolute government over the world itself. The
grouping or combining these miracles in such order* is an
admirable illustration of the method of the Evangelist, and con-
futes the notion of some, that the parts of this Gospel have been
disarranged.
We add an observation on Matt. viii. 29 : " And behold they
cried out, saying; what have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou
Son of God? Art thou come to torment us before the time?"
(xacr/oo, the appointed time.)
Mark and Luke add "Most High," and they represent the
demons as adjuring Jesus not to torment them. It is evident
they knew his person and his name, and their absolute subjec-
tion to his poAver. Yet it cannot be inferred from their woi'ds,
if interpreted according to the idiom of the language, that they
understood his personality in the Godhead. Adam was a son
of God, and Luke so calls him, Luke iii. 38, comp. with verse 23.
Dominion, glory, and bliss had been given him. In the pos-
session of these he resembled God, and in this sense, as well as
that of creation, he might be called a son of God. From the
expression, " Art thou come to torment us before the time?"
we infer that they took him to be that mysterious man, or seed
promised at the fall, by Avhose power they had understood from
* It is important to notice that the Evangelist introduces this miracle in this
place by anticipation — departing from the onler of time; and for no other
reason that we can perceive, than argumentative effect, as above suggested.
But this was a sufficient motive. See Mark v. 1 — 13; Luke viii. 20 — ^4.
92 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
the beginning, the dominion of Satan, their leader and prince,
was at some time to be crushed. It was before the time ap-
pointed for this purpose, as the event has shown : for the world
is still subject, in some measure at least, to Satan's power.
Rom. xvi. 20 ; 1 Pet. v. 8. But how thej knew, or whether
they knew the precise time or season of the event they so
earnestly deprecated, is a question about which we need not
inquire. See Mark xiii. 32. They can no more penetrate the
secrets of the Divine mind, than the most ignorant of God's
creatures. Yet they may be permitted to know what men may
not, and cannot know in this life ; and God may withhold from
Satan and his hosts the knowledge of things which he makes
known to holy angels, or even to men. The word "deep"
{dj^ucraop,) employed by Luke, shows what their fear was. It is
the same word which is translated ^^ bottomless pit" in Rev. xx.
1,3; ix. 1,2, 11; xi. 7; xvii. 8.
CHAPTER III.
The po-wer of faith. — The call of Matthew. — The harvest field. — Powers con-
ferred on the Apostles. — Sending forth the Twelve. — Necessity of distinguish-
ing between the person, offices, or authority of Jesus. — First conspiracy
against the life of Jesus. — Chief intent of John's inquiry of Jesus by his
disciples, "Art thou he that should come?" ?a,i which,
according to Dr. Kennicott, very remarkably signifies hereafter as to time, and
from above as to place; both of which senses are combined by St. Paul in
1 Cor. XV. 47.
Ernst Bertheau, Professor at Gottingen, not perceiving the allusion to the
Second Adam, and finding a difficulty in extracting any intelligible meaning
from the Hebrew text as it stands, proposes to change iJtTijjt^T Kal into
''Dtl'^X^ni Iliphil, and render the words thus: "And thou hast caused me, as
it were, to see the succession of men from this time upwards" — in other words:
"The line of men which stretched onward from David in an unbroken series
into the remote future, appears as an ascending line rising upward to an
immeasurable distance." This author admits, that if the present reading is
retained, "i^ji (tor) must be understood in the sense of tmri' (torat) which,
according to Bishop Horsley, may well be without rejecting the word ,ib3>?3n
as superfluous, altliough Professor Bertheau thinks it must be, as a necessary
consequence of such an interpretation. As to the expedient of changing Kal
into Iliphil, without the authority of a MS. (see Dr. Kennicott's Ed. of the
Hebrew Bible) it is, to say the least, a very bold one and entirely unnecessary;
as the notes of Dr. Kennicott and Bishop Horsley above quoted, abundantly
prove. S. Cahen admits that the passage is difficult. He renders it, following
De Wette, "Tu m'as regarde d'une mani^re humaine, toi qui es eleve,
Jehova Dieu." He cites Kimchi, who finds in the words this meaning: " Thou
hast regarded me, as if I were a man of elevated rank, whereas I am a pitiful
96 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
scheme of incarnation, regard was had to the honour of David
and his family as a secondary object, by making it a part of
the plan that the Messiah should be born in his family." See
Barrett's Synopsis of Criticisms. Vol. ii. Part ii. pp. 545,
646.
If we carefully consider and compare this address of David,
with the Psalm, which it is probable he had previously com-
posed, we shall perceive that the purpose of redeeming the
world and such a race as mankind are, by such an expedient as
the incarnation, was a matter of inexpressible wonder to him ;*
but his wonder passes into amazement when he is informed that
this Son of Man, the Second Adam, the heir and the Lord of
the world, should condescend to become the heir of his throne.
If John the Baptist had equally just conceptions of the Lord
Jesus, as the Son of Man, (and who can doubt it? John i. 15,)
no wonder that he recoiled from the service of baptizing him
with water. Matt. iii. 14 ; but the tempter surely had not, or he
could not have thought of alluring him by the gift of what was
being." The Septuagint and the Syriac translators followed, as this author
supposes, a different reading.
The truth is, the difficulty lies less in the language than in conceiving the
Divine purpose which it expresses. It belongs to the mysteries of the king-
dom, which mere learning and sagacity, however acute, can never discover.
Matt. xiii. 11. As to the signification of ^y^, see Venema Hist. Eccl. vol. i.
p. 488. Calasio's Concord, ad voc. ^ij-). It is an argument in favour of the
received text, that it is the more difiicult, inasmuch as the difficulty lies
chiefly in our inability to grasp the sublime idea the words are intended to
convey.
* Anticipating the restitution of all things under the Son of Man, and in
prophetic vision seeing it accomplished, the Psalmist exclaims with holy admi-
ration and awe, "0 Jehovah (Adonenu) our Lord, 0 how excellent (great, illus-
trious,) is thy name in all the earth ! '' Reverting then to its fallen and disordered
condition, he summarily sets forth the redemptive work of Christ by which
this great change was wrought: and Satan and his hosts, the mighty enemies,
which had so long held it in subjection, overcome and expelled (stilled). This
wonderful work was accomplished by strength constructed and raised up out
of the weakness of babes and sucklings. The next thought that strikes him, is
the wonderful condescension of God, whose power is so mighty, whose wisdom
so incomprehensible, whose works are so vast: — that he should be mindful
and care for, poor, miserable, mortal man, and especially that he should visit
such creatures in the way of an alliance with them in their nature, and for
ever so little a time submit to be lower (in that nature) than his angels, and
not only to suffer want, but to have his wants supplied by his own creatures.
Matt. iv. 11; Luke xxii. 43. — The condescension is so great that he has no
words to express his conception of it. He therefore passes immediately to
the exaltation of the (ben Adam) Son of Man, thus taken into union with the
Divine nature, and exultingly adds: "Thou hast crowned him with glory and
honour (the honour of the Father;) Thoti hast invested him with (absolute)
dominion over these (terrestrial) works of thy hands; Thou hast put all things
(pertaining to the earth ; all its natures, powers, and creatures in absolute
subjection to him) under his feet," &c. The Psalmist can say no more; and
for want of other words, ends this inspired effusion as he began it: "0
Jehovah, our Lord, how excellent is thy name in all the earth!"
THE CALL OF MATTHEW. 97
already his own. Matt. iv. 8, 9; Luke iv. 5 — 7, and Bengel on
Matt, xvi. 13.
Matt. ix. 9. "And as Jesus passed forth from thence, he
saw a man named Matthew sitting at the receipt of custom, and
he saith unto him : Follow me. And he arose and followed
him."
It is worthy of heing remarked, that the call of the Saviour
■was always effective. We have no instance in which the least
delay or hesitation was manifested. Like the Avinds and the
waves, diseases and unclean spirits, they yielded instantly to
the power of his word, thus recognizing in the most impressive
manner his authority to command them. Matthew, otherwise
called Levi the son of Alpheus, Mark ii. 14 ; Luke v. 27, was,
at the moment of his call, actually engaged in the performance
of his public duties. Luke adds, "he left all." Simon and
Andrew, James and John, were called under similar circum-
stances. Matt. iv. 18, 22; see John i. 35 — 51. We have no
particular account of the calling of Thomas, of James the son
of Alpheus, of Lebbeus, surnamed Thaddeus, of Simon the
Canaanite, [;^>^-^.ft;r^C, Luke vi. 15; Acts i. 13, the zealous or
the zealot], nor of Judas Iscariot; yet as they were the appointed
instruments of the Saviour's work, we have no reason to sup-
pose that they did not yield instantly and implicitly to the
power of his word. See Matt. xix. 27.
Matthew, it is probable, was the only one of the twelve apos-
tles Avho was called from a thriving worldly condition. His
employment was lucrative, and honourable among the Romans,
but highly disreputable among the Jews. Luke v. 29, 30. The
account which he gives of himself is characterized by great
modesty and even humility; an evidence that neither his employ-
ment nor worldly wealth had corrupted his heart. See Luke
xix. 1—10; iii. 12, 13.
Matt. ix. 18 — 31. The miracles recorded in these verses,
are further examples of the power of faith; see note on Matt,
viii. 2, 3, and with that view of them, it is suggested, they were
introduced by the Evangelist in this place. The Saviour had
before this time restored to life the widow's son at Nain, Luke
vii. 11 — 13; but that miracle, though a wonderful proof of the
Saviour's power and compassion, was not an illustration of the
power of faith. The Evangelists, in composing their Gospels,
selected from the abundant materials they had at hand, such as
were best suited to some particular point or purpose they had
in view. Thus John records the miracle of raising Lazarus
from the dead for the purpose of showing, among other things,
the reason why the rulers of the nation precipitated their mea-
sures for the destruction of the Lord Jesus. John xi. 46 — 51.
13
98 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
Luke's object in recording the raising of the widow's son at
Nain, was to illustrate the great compassion of our Lord as
well as his power; while Matthew, in the passage under con-
sideration, further illustrates and enforces, bj various instances,
the power of faith. -See Luke viii. 50; Mark v. 36.
The miracles mentioned in these verses suggest many instruc-
tive thoughts, and we may return to them hereafter. They have
been thus briefly alluded to in this place for the purpose of
pointing out to the reader, the plan, in one particular, upon
which this Gospel was composed, and vindicating it from the
suspicion that its contents have been disarranged.
Matt. ix. 35. "And Jesus went about all the cities and
villages, teaching in their synagogues and preaching the gospel
of the kingdom and healing every sickness and every disease
among the people."
This tour, which must have occupied a considerable time, in
which many discourses must have been delivered, and a great
many miracles performed, is described in the most general
terms. A particular narrative of it, we may easily believe,
would have filled more pages than the whole Gospel as we have
it. The brevity is characteristic, and proves that this Gospel
was not intended as a biography of our Lord, or as a journal
or connected record of his public ministry, but rather as excerpts
or selections from large materials. See note on John xx. 19.
The Evangelist's motive for alluding to this tour is suggested
by the next verse.
Matt. ix. 36. "But when he saw the multitudes, he was
moved with compassion on them, because they fainted, and
were scattered abroad as sheep having no shepherd."
The Lord was attended on this tour by his disciples. It dis-
closed to them the condition of the people, although they were
not sensible of their extreme destitution. He called their
attention to it, as a subject in which they ought to feel a deep
concern, and employ the means best suited to remove it.
Matt. ix. 37, 38. " Then saith he unto his disciples, the
harvest," as you see, "truly is plenteous, but the labourers few:
pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest that he will (would)
send labourers into his harvest."
A congeries of sublime ideas, if interpreted, as the verse
should be, according to the parable of the tares of the field.
Matt. xiii. 24, 38, 39, 41. The harvest-field is the world; the
harvest the countless myriads of the human race ; the time of
the harvest is the end of the world, and the Lord of the harvest
is the Son of Man. The idea contained in the word [depcaixoz)
harvest^ includes the whole work of preparation for it — all the
means which enter into the Divine plan for producing the grand
THE HARVEST FIELD. 99
result — the sowing of the seed, the culture of the plants, and
finally the gathering of the products. The Saviour, on a later
occa-sion, John xii. 24, represented even his own body under
the emblem of a corn of wheat, which must fall into the ground
and die, in order that it might be quickened into fructifying
life.
Portions of this vast field were to be occupied in succession
by successive labourers. The first portion in order, was that
upon which the Saviour himself had entered. It was a little angle
in the vast demesnes of the Lord of the harvest. The multi-
tudes, among whom he moved, which excited his compassion,
were comparatively but a handful. On an earlier occasion, he
applied a similar remark to the Samaritans, John iv. 35, show-
ing, that his views embraced other interests than those of Israel.
See John x. 16.
We understand these words, then, in the large sense in which
the Saviour interpreted the parable of the tares of the field.
Matt. xiii. 37 — 43. They embrace all nations, and all times,
till the Son of Man, the Lord of the harvest, shall come. But
what- we desire particularly to notice, is the majesty of the
character of the Lord of the harvest. He is the Lord of the
field, and the field is the world. He is the absolute proprietor
of whatever may be gathered from it. He calls it His harvest.
He superintends the whole work, and sends forth whom he will
to perform it.
The word [ixjSahj) translated send forth, implies a compelling
force. The same word is translated, in Mark i. 12, driveth.
The connection shows that force from the hand of the Lord of
the harvest is intended. This interpretation suggests that the
Saviour had respect especially to the day of Pentecost, when
the apostles entered upon their labours under the inspiration
and impulse of the Holy Spirit, and preached the word as they
were moved by him. It may be added, that the word {kpyazrj^)
labourer, is used by the apostle Paul to denote a prophetic or
inspired minister. This interpretation agrees with the fact:
For the Lord Jesus, as Lord of the harvest, sent the Holy
Spirit upon the apostles on the day of Pentecost, and thus
qualified them as labourers for him, John xvi. 7 ; Acts ii. 33,
and constrained them to enter zealously on their work, 1 Cor.
ix. 16.
In a subordinate sense, however, the mission of the Twelve
apostles to the cities of Israel, recorded in the tenth chapter,
and the mission of the Seventy disciples soon after, Luke x.,
may be regarded as the sending forth of labourers into the
harvest. It was a field of labour, though not of success.
Matt. x. 1. "And when he had called unto him his twelve
100 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
disciples he gj) may
come and supersede your service." The difficulty is to deter-
mine what w'e are to understand by the coming of the Son of
Man, (Iwc 0.V iXdr^ 6 ulo^ too d.vdpco7ioij.) If we understand
these words of his coming to put an end to the dispensation for
which he had commissioned them, and to establish his kingdom
in outward glory over the whole earth; the meaning is that the
apostles might never fully accomplish the service for which he
had commissioned them, even if they should live to the end of
time. Lightfoot understands the expression to mean "till the
Son of Man rise from the dead." To this interpretation
Whitby objects, for several reasons, but chiefly because in their
first mission (from wdiich they presently returned,) they met
with no persecution, and because the phrase " the coming of
the Son of Man," never signifies our Lord's coming at his
resurrection, but only his coming to destroy the Jewish nation,
or to the final judgment. Hence he adds that "seeing the
apostles were none of them to live till the day of judgment, it
seems necessary to understand this of his coming to avenge his
quarrel on the Jewish nation." Dr. Whitby's objections to
Lightfoot's interpretation seem to be unanswerable. The ob-
jections to Dr. Whitby's interpretation are, that the sense he
puts upon these words is not supported by the texts which he
cites, viz. Matt. xxiv. 27, 30, 37, 44; xxv. 13; Mark xiii. 26;
Luke xviii. 8 ; xxi. 27 ; all of which refer to our Lord's coming
to the final judgment. His interpretation is equivalent to the
sense just before expressed, that the apostles might never be
able to accomplish fully, even in the method which he pre-
scribed, the service on which he sent them, because the cities of
Israel would be destroyed and their population be dispersed by
the Romans, before they could go over them. Our Lord ap-
pears to have referred in this expression, "till the Son of Man
be come," to the time of the death of John the Baptist, when
his mission to that people as the Messiah was ended, and he
was about to go forth to them in the character of Son of Man and
Saviour of all who would come to him, whether the nation and
the communities composing it would receive him as the Christ
or not. According to the distinction stated by John i. 11, 12,
He came to his own as the Christ and his own people received
him not, but as many as afterwards received him as the Son of
Man and Saviour of the world, to them gave he power to be-
come the sons of God, &c. See the original Greek. This will
be more fully explained hereafter.
Matt. xi. 1. "Audit came to pass that when Jesus had
made an end of commanding his twelve disciples, (and had sent
14
106 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
them forth by two and two, Mark vi. 7,) he (also) departed
thence to teach and to preach in their cities."
Until this time, the apostles had followed the Lord Jesus as
learners, witnessing the miracles he performed, but without
possessing any miraculous powers themselves. Now they were
to be more or less separated from him, at least for a time.*
They were to preach or proclaim the presence of the king-
dom. This was the great fact — the great event of the times —
the greatest event which has occurred in this world since the
fall of man. Their mission, then, was of the most important
nature, even with the restriction before mentioned, that they
were not commissioned to expound the law or call the nation to
repentance, as John the Baptist did. Luke iii. 7 — 14. The
powers they were invested with, and which they exercised in
the name of Jesus, sufficiently authenticated their proclama-
tion.
Matt. xi. 2 — 15. "But John (the Baptist) having heard in
prison of the (miraculous) works of Christ, sending two of his
disciples, said to him, Art thou he that should come (6 ep^ofxe-
voc) or should we look for another," &c.t
John had been in prison, according to Dr. Lightfoot, about
seven or eight months, see note on Luke iii. 20, 21, when
he sent this question to Jesus, and various are the motives
which commentators have ascribed to him in sending it. See
Whitby's note, for some of them ; also Scott and Henry on this
verse. With Dr. Whitby, we cannot believe that the Baptist
could make this inquiry on his own behalf, or doubt whether
Jesus were the Messiah or not ; for he was sent to bear witness
of him, and received from heaven a sign by which he should
certainly know him. John i. 6 — 8, 33; iii. 28 — 30. Nor can
we believe that John sent his disciples for their own satisfac-
tion in the matter, but as suggested in the note just referred
to, was moved to do so by the Holy Spirit, for a most
important end. If we consider what transpired at our Lord's
baptism. Matt. iii. 14; John i. 33, 34, the question seems
a very remarkable one for John to put. It was sent publicly,
and put to Jesus when he was surrounded by multitudes.
The people knew by this act that Jesus was that mighty
One of whom John had previously testified in general terms.
* There are reasons for supposing that after the death of John the Baptist,
they did not separate from him for the purpose of preaching the kingdom, as
will appear hereafter.
f The first verse of this chapter should have been included in the last chap-
ter. It is probable the true reading is "when John heard of the works of
Jesus," &c. See Mill. Naebe, Harwood. But as the word is used historically,
the question is not important to our purpose.
Christ's testimony to John's character and office. 107
It was an official and public act, the last and most explicit tes-
timony of John to the Messiahship of the Lord Jesus. The
chief intention of the transaction was, however, as we appre-
hend, that the Lord might publicly testify in the most unquali-
fied and strongest terms to the character and office of John,
and formally tender him to the people for their acceptance, as
the divinely appointed Elias of the economy of law under
which they were placed. See note on Luke iii. 20, 21. His
testimony was not only of the strongest kind, but most explicit.
He declared that John was a prophet and more than a prophet —
a prophet whose mission had been foretold ; having authority to
preach a new dispensation. Virtually he declared that neither
Enoch, nor Noah, nor Abraham, nor Moses, nor David, nor
Elijah, was greater than John the Baptist. See notes on
Matthew iii. 1, 2; and John x. 41. Having thus attested
the character of John, he added, what we paraphrase thus : " If
ye will receive" not it but him, " he shall be to you," now under
this economy of law, the same as Elias; that is, the same that
Elias shall hereafter be to you under the economy of grace.
This offer was made as a test or trial, in a way suited to the
popular apprehension, in order to show by their neglect or
rejection of it, the insufficiency of the highest motives, backed
by all the evidence the nation had of John's authority, enhanced
by the express testimony of the Lord Jesus, and the evidence
of his miracles, to prevail with them to accept John in the
spirit of his mission; for it should be remembered that the
coming of Elias was universally and justly regarded by the
nation as the sure harbinger of Israel's greatest national glory
and happiness.
The Lord knew full well what the result would be, yet it
seemed to the Divine wisdom not the less proper that the test
should be applied; for the Jews were then the subjects of law,
and the law assumed that they were capable* of performing its
requirements. Exodus xix. 5, 6. Yet, had they been really
holy, and, therefore, really capable of fulfilling the law, Elijah
would have been sent to them at that time, as we may believe,
and not John. But because salvation by law was not possible,
and because a dispensation of grace could not be introduced
except through the failure of the law, and the rejection and
death of Christ, and consequently of his forerunner, Rom.
viii. 3; Acts xiii. 39; Rom. iii. 20; Heb. vii. 18, 19, John
was raised up and sent tq them in the place of Elias, with the
spirit and power of Elias, to perform the office of Elias under
the law, in order that it might be possible for God, consistently
with his own holiness, through the rejection and sufferings of
Christ, to give them the grace to receive the true Elias when
108 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
he should be sent to them ; and so become prepared to receive
their Mesiah at his second coming. In dealing with Israel,
God regarded them as the subjects of law, and accountable for
every breach of it. At the same time he regarded them, as
they truly were, the subjects of a hopeless depravity, and as
utterly helpless in themselves. According to this double
aspect he formed the scheme of redemption, involving, as
necessary expedients, two advents of Messiah, and two fore-
runners; yet so, that the purposes and requirements of his
law should not be annulled or interfered with by his purposes
of grace. Wonderful scheme ! Wonderful in the developments
of the past ! and in the yet greater wonders of the future !
From these considerations we may get some proper appre-
hension of John's character. He was no mediocral person,
liable to be swayed, or swerved from the purpose for which he
was raised up, by the disturbing influences of fleshly or human
appetites and passions, as a reed is shaken by the wind,
verses 7 and 8. He was great before the Lord. Luke i. 15.
Everything touching him took hold of the deep mysteries of
the kingdom, and for that reason imparted a mystery to his
person and ofl&ce, which none of his contemporaries could com-
prehend. See notes on Matt. iii. 1, 3, 6, 11, 12, 14, 17;
Luke i. 17; John i. 22, 23, 25; x. 41; Luke iii. 20, 21;
Matt. iv. 12. We add a few observations upon some of the
clauses of this passage.
Matt. xi. 3. "Art thou he that should come?" {lu ei 6
kp^ofjizvo^.) Dr. Whitby remarks, that these words were in
those days the common style for the Messias. He refers to
Matt. iii. 11; John i. 15, 27; Matt. xxi. 9; xxiii. 39; Luke
xix. 38; Hab. ii. 3, cited Heb. x. 37; Dan. vii. 13; Matt.
xxiv. 30; xxvi. 64. Yet our Lord came also as the Son of
Man, Matt, xviii. 19; Luke xix. 10; Matt. xx. 28; Mark x.
45; Luke ix. 56, -and that character he openly and publicly
assumed. In that character he repeatedly declared that he
would yet come again. Matt. xvi. 27; xxiv. 27, 30; Mark
xiii. 26; Luke xxi. 27; Matt. xxiv. 37, 39, 44; xxv. 13, 31.
The words under consideration in themselves are applicable to
a coming in either character. Yet the characters are not
identical, though united in his person. We have seen how
they came to be united, and how David was affected by the
revelation of God's purpose to blend them in the heir of his
throne. See note on Matt. ix. 2^6. This twofold character
or relation in which he was to come, may be one reason for
the form of the question, which pointed, nevertheless, to his
Messiahship, i. e. the character which he did not iniblkly
assume or claim. Matt. xvi. 20; xxvi. 63; Luke xxii. 67;
EXPLANATION OF JOHN'S QUESTION. 109
John X. 24. In this character only, was there any occasion
for the inquiry. Why, then, it may be inquired, did not John
put the question to him, phiinly as the people did, John x. 24,
Art thou the Christ? The reason is suggested by the form
of the answer our Lord returned to John, which consisted in
an appeal to his works, "Go show John the things that ye do
hear and see," &c. ; that is to say, let John collect from this
evidence, whether I am he who Moses and the prophets did
say should come. See John i. 45. And in the same way he
answered the people, John x. 24, 25; v. 36, after the death
of John.
And if we reflect upon the exalted nature of the ofiice of
Messiah, we shall perceive a reason for the form of both the
question and the answer. The attributes and the office of
Messiah are of so high a nature, that the right to it could not
be established or proved to human or finite judgment, by the
mere claim or assertion of man; nor indeed by any merely
human or natural testimony or proof. So far from it, the
assertion of a claim to it upon such grounds confutes itself,
and so in effect our Lord declared. John v. 43; Matt. xxiv. 5.
Hence the Divine wisdom appointed as the necessary proof of
our Lord's Messiahship a dispensation of miraculous evidence^
from which the people were to determine whether he Avere the
Christ or not. This explains our Lord's saying to his disci-
ples after the close of his public ministry — "If I had not done
among them the works Avhich none other man did, they had not
had sin," John xv. 24, and also his saying to the people: "If
I do not the works of my Father, believe me not, but if I do,
though ye believe not me, believe the works," John x. 37, 38,
thus appealing, if we may so say, from his own word to his
works. These considerations explain also the form of John's
question. He did not fall into the error of the Jews, John x.
24, nor of the High Priest, Luke xxii. 67, who had no ade-
quate or proper conception of the mystery of the throne of
David, or of the Messiah, but being filled with the Holy Ghost,
and moved by him to send the question, he put it in the only
form consistent with the Divine plan.
Matt. xi. 10. "For this is he of whom it is written. Behold
I send my messenger before thy face which shall prepare the
way before thee."
This quotation was made from Mai. iii. 1. If the prophecy
of the same prophet, Mai. iv. 5, 6, concerning Elijah, was
applicable to John the Baptist, and was fulfilled by his mission,
we cannot account for our Lord's omission to quote it. His
object was to set forth in the most impressive manner, the
dignity and excellence of John's character and ministry, as
110 NOTES ON SCRIPTUEE.
is evident by the next (the 11th) verse. Elijah was the
prophet whom the nation expected, as the forerunner of Mes-
siah. Matt. xvii. 10; Mark ix. 11. It was the common
doctrine of the Scribes. Our Lord, however, did not say,
"For this is he of whom it is written, Behold I will send Elijah
the prophet," &c., although the quotation of this prophecy,
falling in with the preconceived opinion and expectation of the
nation, and by its explicitness, would have been more im-
pressive, and for that reason would have been quoted, if it were
applicable to John. To make up, however, for any difference
there may be in the two prophecies in this respect, our Lord
adds (verse 11) in effect, that John the Baptist was equal to
Elijah, and if any had been born of woman who were greater
than Elijah, then John was also greater than Elijah; thus in
the most expressive and unqualified manner, by a sweeping
comparison, declaring that John was at least the equal if not
the superior of Elijah the prophet, whom the nation expected.
The design of the Saviour appears to have been, on the one
hand, to avoid affirming that John was Elijah, or that the
prophecy concerning Elijah was fufilled in him; and on the
other hand, to affirm that John was at least equal to Elijah,
and that his ministry among them should have the effect of
Elijah's, if they would receive him with their hearts, in the spirit
of his mission, verse 14. How this could be, was a mystery to
the nation, which our Lord intimated by the words, verse 15,
"He that hath ears to hear, let him hear."
Matt, xi. 12, 13. "And from the days of John the Baptist
until now, the kingdom of heaven {^ca^erac) suffereth violence,
and the violent take it by force: For all the prophets and the
law prophesied until John."
This passage is regarded by commentators as difficult, and if
we may judge by the variety of the interpretations put upon it,
few are more so. We take it in connection with Luke xvi. 16,
■where the same general sentiment is expressed somewhat
differently. "The law and the prophets were until John.
Since that time the kingdom of God (euayyek^era:) is 'preached,
and every man (J^ia^erac) presseth into it."
We observe that instead of the words {^ca^erac) sitffereth
violence, Luke uses the words {euayyeXc^^eTcu) is preached, and
instead of the words {^caazac d.p~a^oo(Tcu auvr^v) the violent
take it by force, Luke uses the words (Tiac ^k ahx-qv ^la^evac)
every man presseth into it. Is it - allowable to interpret the
earlier by the later text — Matthew by Luke? We do not
know a safer rule. If the Gospel of Matthew was first written,
and Luke was acquainted with it, he Avould, in composing a
Gospel for Gentile churches, interpret into plain language such
THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN SUFFERETH VIOLENCE. Ill
idiomatic or figurative expressions and allusions as would not
be easily understood except by Jews. Comp. Luke xxiii. 47
with Matt, xxvii. 54, and see notes on these verses.
But this rule requires a modification .of the translation. The
word {^ca^erai,) which occurs in both places, is translated in
Matthew, suffereth violence, but in Luke, presseth, i. e. in the
former it is taken in reality in the passive sense, but in the
latter as in the active or middle voice. But this is not neces-
sary. On the contrary, if we interpret the word in the middle
voice in both places, a clear and consistent sense is elicited.
In this voice, the word signifies, in this connection, "to press,
to urge itself upon or against."* Substituting this sense for
"suffereth violence," the verse will read, "And from the days
of John the Baptist until now, the kingdom of heaven urgeth
(presseth) itself upon" ^. e. upon this generation, for their
acceptance, which in plain language signifies, is earnestly
preached to them, {^uo.yjs.XcC,eTae) and this is the expression of
Luke, which we may regard as an interpretation of the figure.
The remaining clause or phrase should be interpreted in a
sense consistent with the historical facts ; for we do not regard
it as a precept or evangelical maxim, as most commentators do,
but as a declaration of the manner in which the preaching of
the kingdom was received by the Jews during the ministries of
John the Baptist and our Lord. They did not press into the
kingdom with a holy urgency. On the contrary, as Luke says,
{jto-z dz aurrjv (^ca^ezae) every man, meaning the generality of
the people, (presseth) pressed himself against itf — resisted it,
(for so we interpret the preposition e^V) see Luke xii. 10;
Matthew xviii. 21; Rom. iv. 20; or, in the more figurative
language of Matthew, {d.[maC,oovhom [who] say
ye that I am?" Without making any observation on these
opinions of the people, our Lord immediately propounds the
same question to the disciples, somewhat abbreviated, yet
man, with natural understanding, that cometh .into the world, John i. 9, and
that, as he is God's image." Col. i. 15. It was in this image Adam was
created; and it has pleased the Father, that all fulness should dwell in Christ.
Col. i. 19 There is nothing of God communicable to us, or
to any creature in heaven or earth [except by derivation from, or] out of
Christ's fulness, either of Nature, or Grace, or Glory." — Glory of Christ, by
Joseph Hussey, p. 103, 104.
[The] image then spoken of in Genesis, i. 26, is the substantial image of
God, Heb. i. 3, or the Glory Man subsisting in the second person of
God : so standing in him before Adam, as to and tvith God, who is incapable
of changeable sight, he was considered and reputed the same. He was to
stand for ever. lb. p. 102.
What can we make of these texts [of the Old Testament] which call him
The Man [The Adam] (Ezek. ix. 3, 11 ; x. 2, 6, 7; Dan. xii. 6, 7; Zech. vi.
11, 12 ; xiii. 7) if we shut out his secret being with God before the open ways
and means, of his open being with men ? Was he a man at all in their sense,
who deny that he was a man otherwise than intentionally to be a man, till he
existed by incarnation in the Virgin's womb ? They think it enough, because
'tis orthodox to own he was God, without beginning, and Man in and from the
Virgin's womb. But though this is truth and orthodox, it is not all the truth.
It is sound to hold the person of the Mediator, God-Man, to be
one person and two distinct natures, but it is not sufficient, if we do not begin
the human nature as the secret glory-man with the Father in the Son from
everlasting. Prov. viii. 22 — 31 ; John xvii. 5.
He was actually man to God before his incarnation in the womb, of the sub-
stance of the Virgin. He was a man trith God by a beginning from everlast-
ing, as well as he was actually God before without beginning from everlasting.
He was a man secretly in the covenant before he was incarnate secretly in his
mother's womb. This was the condition of the Mediator to and with God in
the everlasting covenant. 2 Sam. xxiii. 5; vii. 18, 19; 1 Chron. xvii. 17. The
intermediate successions of things, and all the changes in the ways and means,
were future or to be, in respect of the Man and in respect of the church; not
in respect of God : For it was done in God and to God and uith God, before ;
and yet the Divine Settlements and laws of Heaven made it as necessary, that
it should be done in the man and to the man successively through time, as it was
certainly done in God, to God, and with God, upon the man, by infallible set-
tlements, constitution, and make, in his secret covenant among the persons of
the Godhead, before all time." — Hussey, Glory of Christ Unveiled, p. 185.
Calvin says in his readings upon Daniel: "In eo nihil est absurdi qu6d
Christus aliquam speciem humansB naturse exhiberet antequam manifestatus
in carne." Calvin, however, does not maintain this view.
Dr. Henry More [Oper. fol. 66) says: " Quodque Angelus qui ducebat
Israelitas in terram Canaan, Christus erat, videtur plan6 asseri 1 Cor. x. 5.
Neque tentemus Christum sicut quidam eorum tentarunt, etc. Christus vero
non nudus Deus est, sed complexum quid ex humana, natura. et Divina. Per-
pende Heb. xi. 2G Atque profectd aniniam Messiee in rerum naturi.
fuisse antequam nostram carncm sumpserat, sensus maxime facilis ac naturalis
illius loci 1 John iv. 2, videtur etinm inferre. n*v Trnuf^dL o ojuoxoyu Iikt^.uv Xp/o-Tov
iv (TapKi iXukuScrai ix, rou Qau Wtiv Sensus enim genuiuus est,
Quicnnque spiritus profitetur Jesum esse Messiam profectum in carneni sive in
corpus terrestre, ex Deo est; quod supponit eum fuisse, antequam in illud
venerat, vel hue 6 ccelo profectus erat.
" Rursus; cum optima fieri possit, ut ille, etiam ante generationem hominum
et terrarum orbis inhabitationem Messias electus esset (ut ita loquar) et unitus
156 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
importing the same; as if he had said, "But whom [who] say
ye that I, the Son of Man, am?"
Matt. xvi. 16. "And Simon Peter answered and said:
Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God."
It has already been remarked, that there is much more in
this answer than in the exclamation of the disciples, when the
Lord entered their boat from walking on the sea. Matt. xiv. 33.
See notes. The answer is to be interpreted by the terms of the
question, and may be thus expressed: "Thou the Son of Man
art the Christ, the Son of the living God." In his Adamic
nature (or as the Second Adam, that is, Second in the order of
insuper cum Diviao \oya> coelestique gloria ac pulchritudine resplendens inter
angelos in coelo ; haec hypothesis rationem reddet admodum facilem et genui-
nam multorum locorum Novi Testamenti quae aliter valde obscura videntur :
Quemadmodum illud Philip, ii. 6, 7, 8. Multorum enim mentes excruciavit,
qui fieri possit, ut ex eo quod homo fiat, sui ipsius exinanitio in aeternum et
immutabilem Deum cadat. Ad quod tamea textus digitum videtur intendere.
Potest autem admodum proprie competere animoe ^lessioe, qui etiam verd
Deus erat per unionem physicam cum Deitate. Similiter Job. xvii. 4, 5. Glo-
rijicavi te in terra, etc. Nunc igitur glorijica me tu Pater, etc., hoc est, Reduo
me. Pater, rursus ad teipsum ut ek ^gloria, iterum fruar, quam apud te habui
in coelis antequam homines nati essent, atque hie terrai-um orbis formatus.
Postremo Joh. vi. 38. Quia descendi e ca'lo ut faciam,
etc. Et Joh. iii. 31. Qui e coelo venit supra omnes est. Et adhuc explicatius,
Joh. xvi. 28. Ezivi ex Patre et veni in mundum, et iterum relinquo mundum et
proficiscor ad Patrem. Sed omnium explicatissim6, Joh. iii. 13. Nullus enim
ascendit in caelum nisi qui descendit e coelo nempe filius hominis qui est in coelo. . .
. . . Quibus omnibus addere poteris. Joh. yi. 62. Quod si igitur spectaveritis
filium hominis ascendentem eo ubi erat prius. Vide Prov. xxx. 4.
Dr. Watts held to the belief that the human soul of Christ existed with the
Father from before the foundation of the world, on which ground he main-
tained the real descent of Christ from heaven to earth. He says "the gene-
rality of our Christian writers believe that it was only the Divine nature or
Godhead of Christ which had an existence before he was conceived of the Virgin
Mary and became incarnate." But "if we suppose the human soul of
Christ to have a pre-existent state of joy and glory with the Father before the
world was created, these expressions" (which speak of the abasement of Christ
and the humiliating change he passed through) " are great and noble
and have a happy propriety in them to set forth the transcendent love of the
Father in sending his Son ; and of the Son of God in coming from heaven,
And this love is exceedingly enhanced while we consider that this
human soul of Christ was personally united to the Divine Nature, so that
hereby, God himself becomes manifested in the flesh."
There is much more in Dr. Watts's writings in support of this belief. Other
modern authors who have professed and defended it, are Dr. H. More, (before
quoted,) Dr. Edward Fowler, Bishop of Gloucester, Robert Fleming, Joseph
Hussey, (also before quoted,) Bishop Gastrell, Dr. Thomas Bennet, Dr. Thomas
Burnet, Dr. Knight, Dr. Thomas Godwin, and see Dr. Watts's discourses, en-
titled " The Glory of Christ as God-Man, displayed in three Discourses."
These quotations and references are not made with a view to any particular
mode of explaining- the doctrine of the Trinity, but only as they bear upon
the question of the pre-existence of the Son of Man, as the Man of the Cove-
nant, the Glory-Man, the Second Adam, whoso image the apostle Paul teaches,
1 Cor. XV. 45, his elect people will bear.
It is proper to add, that Dr. Owen on Heb. ii. takes a different view.
Peter's confession of christ. 157
manifestation, though First in the order of being) he was the
Son of God. Prov. viii. 22 — 31 ; Luke iii. 38 ; comp. verse
23. In his fleshly nature, which he took from the seed of
Abraham, he was called Son of God by the angel Gabriel,
Luke i. 35, because begotten in that nature by the overshadow-
ing power of the Most High. In his Divine nature also, he was
the Son of God, and one in essence with the Father, as is proved
by many passages. John i. 1 ; 1 Tim. iii. 16 ; Matt. i. 23.
The emphasis of Peter's answer lies, as we conceive, in the
words [tod ZojvTOi;) the living. Under one view, these words
seem superfluous ; for God in his nature is ever-living, eternally
the same and unchangeable in his being. But as indicating
precisely the meaning which the apostle intended to express,
they are by no means superfluous. They signify that as the
Son of God he partook of the life and being of God — of his
nature and attributes, John v. 26, just as the son of a mortal
man partakes of the nature of the father who begat him. Thus
interpreted, these words declare the profoundest mystery of
redemption, to wit, the incarnation of God the Son, in Christ,
which, as we learn by the next verse, could never be known
except by the revelation of the Father.
Whether David perceived this mystery, when Nathan con-
veyed to him God's promise concerning the Messiah, cannot be
determined, as has been observed, by his address on that occa-
sion. 1 Chron. xvii. ; 2 Sam. vii. See notes on Matt. ix. 4.
What struck his mind with overwhelming force, was the exalted
nature and attributes of our Lord's 7nanhood. Nor can we
determine from the words of Peter on this occasion, whether
he apprehended as David did. our Lord's greatness and glory
as the Second Adam. We infer that he did not, as that was
not the truth especially revealed to him at that time. Hence
the importance, if not the necessity of considering together
these difi'erent revelations, as it is only by combining them we
can form any proper apprehension of the greatness and glory
of Christ, as God-Man-Messiah.
Matt. xvi. 17. "And Jesus answered and said unto him,
Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona, for flesh and blood hath not
revealed [it] unto thee, but my Father which is in Heaven."
There is an emphasis or animation in these words, which
seems to indicate that our Lord rejoiced that the Father had
now at length been pleased to discover this great mystery of
his person to one of his disciples. Luke x. 21; Matt. xi. 25.
It was a great event, and was soon followed, as we shall see, by
the disclosure of other mysteries by himself, of which the dis-
ciples had not the remotest conception before; we mean the
158 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
mysteries of his death, resurrection, and glorification, verse 21 ;
and xvii. 1, 2. This apostle was blessed in being chosen first
to receive and declare this great mystery of the incarnation.
He was told that the discovery he had made, was not due to his
own sagacity, or any human teaching, or even to his own
Divine teaching, but solely to the revelation of the Father.
It is worthy of observation also, that our Lord addresses this
apostle by his original name, Simon Bar-jona, as he did after
his resurrection, at the Sea of Tiberias, John xxi. 15, 16, 17,
and not by that he had given him at their first interview before
his call. John i. 42. That there is something significant in this
manner of address we cannot doubt. At least it renders
probable the suggestion, that the name Peter was then first
given him to denote the fact that he first declared the Divine
Sonship of the Lord Jesus.
Matt. xvi. 18. "And I say unto thee that thou art Peter"
[that is, that thou art he who has rightly declared the mystery
of my person as Son of Man] " and upon this rock" [this
foundation, meaning Grod's work of revealing to his elect people
the mystery of the incarnation] " I will build my church, and
the gates of hell" [that is death] "shall not prevail against it."
Matt. xvi. 19. "And I will give unto thee the keys of
the kingdom of heaven, [literally, of the heavens,] and what-
soever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven,
[literally, in the heavens,] and whatsoever thou shalt loose on
earth shall be loosed in heaven," [literally, in the heavens.]
Great use is made of these words by Romanists to establish
the supremacy of Peter over the other apostles, and of those
who claim to be his successors, over the Church of Christ, but
without good reason. One argument against this use of the
passage is derived by Protestant commentators from Matt,
xviii. 18, where the power claimed for Peter, it is supposed, is
expressly given to all the apostles, or rather to the Church.
The verse reads thus : "Verily I say unto you, whatsoever ye
shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven," — not in the
heavens, as in Matt. xvi. 19 — " and whatsoever ye shall loose
on earth shall be loosed in heaven" — not in the heavens, as
before.
In the context of this passage, xviii. 15 — 18, our Lord had
prescribed a course of proceeding to be observed towards an
ofi"ending brother, the last step of which was, to make a com-
plaint against him to the Church. . This plainly is a measure of
church discipline. He then added, addressing all the disciples,
"Whatsoever ye shall bind," &c. We observe here a change
from the plural of the word heaven, which the Lord used when
THE KEYS GIVEN TO PETER. 159
addressing Peter, to the singular, and the first question is,
whether the change is unimportant? Are the singular and
plural form of this word (heaven) indiscriminately used ? See
notes on Matt. vi. 9. Or is the change of phraseology signifi-
cant and designed ? In the next verse. Matt, xviii. 19, the
Church is not spoken of in a collective capacity, but as if to
show the efiicacy of union in prayer, our Lord adds a similar
promise : " Again I say unto you, that if any two of you shall
agree on earth as touching anything that ye shall ask, it shall
be done for them of my Father which is in heaven," literally,
in the heavens, reverting to the plural form again.
A careful perusal of this Gospel in the original Greek, will
show very clearly that the Evangelist does not use these two
forms of the word indiscriminately, and we assume that the
sense is not the same in the two passages under consideration.
The difference appears to be this : In Matt, xviii. 18, our Lord
is speaking of his future Church, and he gives them a law or
rule, by which they should regulate their conduct in the case of
an offending brother who will not listen to the admonitions of
the Church. Upon this precept, the discipline of excommunica-
tion is in a great measure founded. To this rule the apostle
Paul plainly refers in 2 Thess. iii. 6. Our Lord's meaning
appears to be, that such an act, so done, during the Church
state, and until the end of the dispensation of the Church
militant, shall receive the Divine sanction. The promise to
Peter, on the other hand, is personal to him, and has respect
to the times of the kingdom, which are yet future, and are to
follow the times appointed for the gathering of the elect Church,
and therefore gave him no such supremacy in the Church as has
been claimed for him.
What, precisely, is the import of this promise to Peter, we
know not, nor can we imagine what privileges and powers are
implied in the promise of thrones and dominion over the twelve
tribes of Israel, which our Lord afterwards made to all the
apostles. Matt. xix. 28; and see Luke xxii. 29, 30. If it were
allowable to conjecture upon so obscure a matter, we should
suggest, that the promise to Peter of the gift of the keys is, in
some way, connected with the second advent of our Lord, and
may in some respects be analogous to the oflSce of John th
Baptist or of Elijah.
This dogma of the Romanists rests upon the assumption that
the Church is the kingdom of heaven, which John the Baptist
and our Lord preached, whereas the times of the kingdom are
the times of the restitution of all things, to be introduced at the
second coming of the Lord.
160 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
Matt. xvi. 20. "Then charged he his disciples that they
should tell no man that he was Jesus,* the Christ."
This injunction, it will be borne in mind, was given after the
death of John the Baptist. As we have already suggested
(see notes on Matt. xiv. 10,) the trial of the nation was then
virtually over, and our Lord's ministry among the people was
directed to the reception of himself by individuals as the Son
of Man, rather than to the reception of himself bj/ the nation as
their Messiah, and this may have been one of the motives of
this command. But it should be observed also, that our Lord
did not at any time during his ministry, publicly assume the
title of Christ until after his betrayal, Mark xiv. 62, and then
his public ministry was ended. Then, indeed, such an avowal
was necessary, in order to show more explicitly the public
and formal rejection of him by the nation in that character,
notwithstanding his many miracles, and his sufferings as their
king.
The reasons why our Lord did not publicly assume the
character and title of Christ, have already been sufficiently
stated in the notes on Matt. xi. 3, to which the reader is
referred. f
* Eminent critics agree, that the word 'ixo-cuc should be omitted from the
text. There are fifty-four MSS., it is said, that do not contain this word.
Besides, it is omitted in several versions, and by most of the early Christian
writers who quote this verse. We should therefore, read, "that they should
tell no man that he was the Christ."
f Every reader of the New Testament, must have observed that Jesus (not
Christ) is the name usually employed by the Evangelists to designate our
Lord's person. It occurs about six hundred times in the four Gospels. The
name or title Christ, on the other hand, occurs but seldom; and the name
Jesus Christ still more unfrequently in the Gospels. In Matthew's Gospel, the
name Christ occurs eleven times; in Mark's, six; in Luke's, twelve; and in
John's, eighteen times. The name Jesus Christ, occurs in Matt. i. 1, 18;
Jesus the Christ, in Matt. xvi. 20; Jesus called Christ, in Matt. i. 16. In
Luke's Gospel he is nowhere designated by both these names. If we turn
to the Epistles, we find the reverse to be the fact. The apostles in their
Epistles, and Luke in the Acts, commonly apply to him both names. Jesus
Christ, or the Lord Jesus Christ, or our Lord Jesus Christ, or our Lord and
Saviour Jesus Christ, but seldom Jesus without addition, although sometimes
they do. See Philip, ii. 10 ; 1 Thess. i. 10 ; Heb. ii. 9. In Paul's Epistles,
there are nearly two hundred examples of one or the other of these designa-
tions.
This change is too remarkable to be accounted for on the ground of popular
usage, which Dr. Campbell suggests ; for, as Calvin observes, Inst, book ii,
chap. xvi. § 1, "as the name Jesus was not given him rashly, or by fortuitous
accident, or by the will of man," so we suggest, the change from the name
Jesus, to Christ or Jesus Christ after his ascension was not unadvisedly or
accidentally made, -nor did it come through mere usage or the pleasure of man.
He was not called Christ during his public ministry, because he did not
publicly assume that character, for the reasons above suggested. He was called
Christ after his ascension, because he really was the Christ, and was rejected
by the nation in that character. See notes on Matt. xvii. 22.
chkist's rebuke of peter. 161
Matt. xvi. 21. "From that time forth began Jesus to show
unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and
suffer many things of the elders, and chief priests, and scribes,
and be killed, and be raised again the third day."
It is very interesting to notice the method our Lord observed
in the instruction of his disciples, apart from the multitudes,
after the death of John the Baptist. See John xvi. 4, and
notes on Matt. xiv. 10. The words {dno tore) from that time,
see notes on Matt. iv. 12 — 17, refer to the time of the revela-
tion to Peter of the mystery of the incarnation, verse 16.
This mystery once apprehended, the Lord proceeds immediately
to declare the next in order, namely, the mystery of his death
and resurrection. But these mysteries they were slow to
apprehend. Matt. xvi. 22; xvii. 23; Mark viii. 32; Luke
xviii. 34, and really did not, until after the events foretold had
occurred. Luke xxiv. 20, 21; John xx. 9; Mark ix. 10. Not
understanding these mysteries, they were of course incapable
of comprehending the allusions he made to his ascension, John
vi. 62, and his future advent in glory, John xvi. 12. Yet he
taught this in the plainest terms, verse 27 ; and to enable some
of them better to apprehend his meaning, was transfigured
before them, within eight days after the first of these mysteries
was revealed to Peter. It was a memorable week of their
discipleship; for in this brief space of time the five great
mysteries of redemption were made known to them, namely,
the incarnation, the death, the resurrection, the glorification,
and future advent of the Lord.
Matt. xvi. 22. " Then Peter took him and began to rebuke
him, saying. Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto
thee."
Peter had just been taught by inspiration one great mystery,
but nothing more. Of the rest he was quite as ignorant as his
fellow-apostles, and remained so until he was taught by the
fulfilment of the predicted events. " Men frequently teach,"
or attempt to teach, "all things at once; Divine wisdom acts
far otherwise." Bengel. In the same manner the Avhole of
Divine revelation has been given to the world. Ileb. i. 1.
Peter's observation, however affectionately intended, Avas not
only rash and contradictory to the Saviour and the Scriptures,
but prompted by a carnal mind. It was wholly at variance
with the hidden wisdom of God, in regard to the world's redemp-
tion, as appears by our Lord's reply.
Matt. xvi. 23. " But he turned and said to Peter, Get thee
behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me:" [axavdaXov,
or an impediment in the path of my duty and office,] "for thou
21
162 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of
men."
Peter was looking to a kingdom in the unredeemed world,
groaning as it was, and still is, under the curse of God. He
had no conception of the expedient Divine Wisdom had devised
to repair the ruin brought upon the world and upon men at the
fall by the curse. As however he confidently believed that
Jesus was the Christ, verse 16, he confidently expected his
kingdom would then be established, and with this thought in
his mind and these words on his lips, it is plain he was looking
for a much more inglorious dominion for his Master, than was
worthy of him to establish or accept. It was a kingdom of the
same kind as that which Satan proffered, and which the Lord
rejected with the same words of rebuke he employed on this
occasion. Luke iv. 8. Unwittingly, therefore, Peter, though
an attached friend and follower, touched upon the same point
as Satan did, and so far as his words can be supposed to have
had any persuasive effect, they were a temptation to him to
give up the work of suffering and death, through which alone,
his kingdom could be established consistently with his own glory
and the Divine plan. In this way we account for the sharp-
ness and severity of the Saviour's rebuke, and for the same
form of words he had employed in his answer to the tempter.
Matt. xvi. 21—27.
A close and natural connection of thought runs through
these verses. Peter in his ignorance would have his Master
exempted from the sufferings and death he had now for the first
time plainly predicted. In this he savoured of the things of
men. As Peter's remark showed this, the Lord took occasion
to declare with equal plainness what his followers must expect,
as if he had said, " I must suffer many things of the elders and
chief priests and Scribes, and be put to death. And you, my
followers, must be prepared for the same usage. Covet not the
kingdoms or the glory of this world, but take up the cross of
crucifixion as the slave does, and suffer death upon it, if fidelity
to me requires it. Thinking and feeling thus, you will savour
of the things of God, for it has been appointed that only through
my sufferings and death my kingdom can be established."
This thought brings out the meaning of what follows. " The
loss of life in this way is no loss of life at all. On the con-
trary, it is the divinely appointed way to gain eternal life.
The world, and all the kingdoms of. this world, are really of no
moment. The honour and the eminence they can confer, will
profit you nothing." The Saviour put a case of extreme suf-
fering— that of a torturing, lingering death, with ignominy.
He means to requiret he entire and supreme devotion of his
THE VALUE OF THE SOUL. 163
followers under all, even the most trying circumstances. He
intimates too, that occasions will occur, in which they will be
put to this severest of tests. To counterpoise this, he adds,
that the Son of Man, though he must thus suffer, shall never-
theless afterwards come in the glory of his Father, with retri-
butions and rewards for every man according to his works.
Our Lord here teaches, by implication, if not explicitly, his
second advent in glory, although it is not probable that the
apostles at that time, comprehended his meaning. Luke xviii. 34.
Matt. xvi. 26. "For what is a man profited, if he shall
gain the whole world and lose his own soul? or what shall a
man give in exchange for his soul?"
Man has been called a microcosm, and such indeed he is even
in this life. He is a little world of capabilities, faculties, and
endowments, each of which is susceptible of ever-increasing
enlargement during unending ages. Especially is this true of
man as redeemed and renewed by the Holy Spirit. Every-
thing else, earth-born or earthly, is stinted to certain measures.
This boon of renewed human nature comes from the union of
the believer to Christ through the perpetual indwelling of the
Holy Spirit, whose office it is, not only to sustain and sanctify
him, but to impart to each and every power and faculty of his
nature continual and ever-increasing vigour and growth. See
John i. 4. We know not that such is the condition of any
other order of God's creatures. Even the holy angels, although
they may, and no doubt do, advance from age to age in know-
ledge and happiness in the service of their Maker — as man
now does in the progress of his earthly career — yet do not
sustain that relation to the Redeemer which his elect people
do, Heb. ii. 16 ; nor have we reason to suppose that they are
the subjects of that peculiar creative work which the Holy
Spirit will ever be performing upon the redeemed of mankind.
Much less have we reason to suppose, that those of mankind in
whom the Holy Spirit does not dwell, will share in this privi-
lege or prerogative of the members of the body of Christ. John
XV. 1 — 6. Their powers and faculties may remain what they
may be or will be Avhen their day of grace is over ; for they are
the subjects of the righteous judgment of God, who will render
to them individually according to their deeds. Rom. ii. 5, 6.
Yet if we lay out of view the retributions of the day of judg-
ment, who can estimate the extent of their loss ? To fail of
that union to the Redeemer, which brings them under the
tuition of the Holy Spirit, and insures to them his eternal
indwelling, is to fail of the great end of their being, and in
itself is a loss which cannot be measured. Even if the Divine
goodness, as some vainly imagine, were still to mete out to
164 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
them that measure of happiness which they enjoy in this life,
their station would be fixed among the lowest ranks of creation,
while those in whom the. Holy Spirit dwells will be advanced
by him from one degree of beauty, and glory, and happiness,
and power to another, and their capacities for the service and
the enjoyment of God will be for ever expanding through the
cycles of eternity. What mind can follow the career of the
least of God's elect people ?
The apostle Paul calls believers " the temple of the Holy
Ghost." 1 Cor. iii. 16, 17; vi. 19; 2 Cor. vi. 16. There is
much more in this expression than we are apt. to consider.
We are not to restrict it to the present life. The apostle took
an enlarged view of the destination of the Church. The accom-
plished aggregate of God's elect, raised to glory by the power
of the Holy Spirit, constitute the temple of which he spoke.
This temple is wholly the Spirit's Avorkmanship, Eph. ii. 10, 21,
and he will for ever dwell in it, and adorn it with new glories,
and enlarge and strengthen it by his almighty energies. 1 Cor.
iii. 9 ; Eph. iii. 10. With such views we should ponder the
Saviour's question. What advantage would a man gain, though
the profits of his worldliness were the world itself, if thereby he
suffers even the smallest damage in his soul, or fail of attaining
these high privileges of the saints ?
The expression {ty^u de (po-^'fjv avroo ^r^/jucodrj) lose his own soul^
may perhaps be understood in the sense of suffering damage,
injury, or loss in the soul, or in respect {xaza rr^v oy_rjv) to the
soul. The expression seems to have been transferred from the
business of a merchant whose aims are to make profit or gain
by traffic. The other expression, " What shall a man gain in
exchange,'" &c. {d.vTa)layp.a), may be applied to the case of the
entire loss of it. Thus understood, these two questions have
respect to different classes of persons — the first, to those saved
ones who nevertheless fail, through their worldliness, of the
exceeding blessedness and glory proffered to them, and the last
to those who. shall be finally and for ever lost.
Matt. xvi. 27. "For the Son of Man shall come in the
glory of his Father with his angels ; and then shall he reward
every man according to his Avorks." See John v. 28, 29.
Every person familiar with the Gospels must have observed
that our Lord frequently spoke of himself, as of a third person;
but it was only when he applied to himself the designation in
this text — Son of Man. Yet often, when speaking of himself,
he used the pronominal and customary forms of personal
reference, as in his sermon on the mount. Matt. v. — vii., and
in the discourses recorded by John, v. — x.
Various reasons have been given for this peculiarity, but the
THE TRANSFIGURATION. 165
true reason appears to be, that our Lord used this form of
desicirnation as a titular distinction, to denote his rehition to this
worhl as its Sovereign or Lord, As an. earthly king may speak
of himself as the king, to denote his relation to his people, so
the Lord Jesus spoke of himself as the Son of Man, to denote
his relation to the world as its Lord. The context confirms
this view. Royalty, and absolute, universal government over
the world and the whole race of mankind, belong to him as the
Son of Man, which is as much as to say, that, as Son of Man,
he is the King of the kings, and the Lord of the lords, of the
whole earth. It is in no respect synonymous, as some have
supposed, with his title Messiah. The title Messiah has espe-
cial reference to Israel and the throne of David, Luke i. 32, 33,
and to his elect Church, the Israel of God, (see notes on Matt.
ix. 4, vii. 8,) as we shall have occasion to show hereafter. See
notes on Matt. xvii. 22.
Matt. xvi. 28. "Verily, I say unto you, There be some
standing here which shall not taste of death till they see the
Son of Man coming in his kingdom."
With this promise the conversation near Cresarea Philippi
was concluded. Our Lord commenced it, we have seen, by the
inquiry, "What men said of him as Son of Man." Having
received their answer, he repeated the question to the apostles.
Peter answered it correctly, and received his Master's blessing.
He then spoke to them for the first time plainly, of his rejection
by the nation, his sufferings and death. This drew from Peter
an expression extremely offensive to the Saviour, for which he
was severely rebuked. This done, the Saviour returns to the
subject of suffering, and adds that they also, if they would follow
him, must be willing to suffer, as he was about to suffer, and
even give up their lives in his service. This was very discour-
aging to them. It was so opposite to their expectations and
hopes, that it might naturally be expected to shake their pur-
poses, unless counteracted by some strong assurance of the
ultimate attainment of their hopes, and some demonstration of
the nature and glory of the things he promised. A fit occasion,
therefore, had occurred for the Saviour to make an extraordi-
nary manifestation of his glory, as a counterpoise, so to speak,
to the mournful and discouraging disclosures he had just made.
For these reasons, among others, we suppose that our Lord, in
this promise, tacitly referred to his intended transfiguration,
which occurred on the same day of the week following; thus
bringing within the compass of eight days, to the knowledge of
at least three of the apostles, the great mysteries of the king-
dom, of which before they had no conception. Such appears to
166 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
be the connection of the transfiguration with this conversation
of our Lord with his disciples.
In confirmation of this view, it may be remarked, that Mark
and Luke, as well as IMatthew, narrate the transfiguration in
immediate connection with this promise. Luke varies a little
in his expressions from the other Evangelists. He says it was
about an eight days after these words, {/^era rouq Iojooq tou-
to'j:;, ix. 28,) by which he may refer to this promise in particular,
or to the whole conversation the Saviour had with the disciples
on that occasion.
But understood either way, the transfiguration having occur-
red so soon afterwards, and neither of the Evangelists having
recorded anything the Saviour said or did during the interval,
are very probable grounds for believing that they regarded the
transfiguration the fulfilment of that promise.
Dr. Whitby, however, thought it "wonderful that some com-
mentators, both ancient and modern, should refer this passage
to our Lord's transfiguration on the mount, mentioned in the
following chapter." But his interpretation, which refers it to
the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans, (a.d. 70,) destroys
the connection of thought between this verse and the context.
If it be correct, all the apostles, except John, died without
seeing what the Lord had promised. His chief arguments are
these: '■'•Seeing the transfiguration, could not be seeing the
Son of Man coming in his kingdom ; because his kingdom was
not begun till after the resurrection, when all power in heaven
and earth was given to him." Matt, xxviii. 18. But see Matt.
xi. 27. His next argument is, that "it was as true of all the
disciples as it was of Peter, James, and John, that they should
not taste of death until after that vision."
Our Lord said nothing to the contrary of this. He said that
some of them should not taste of death till they saw the Son
of Man coming in his kingdom; not that some of them sJiould
taste of death before. None of them did taste of death until
long after that vision, but nine of them did taste of death with-
out seeing it, and this is perfectly consistent with the promise.
To the first of these arguments it may be replied, that the
transfiguration was a real though transient manifestation of the
glory of the Son of Man. Moses and Elias realli/ appeared.
It was a real appearing of a bright cloud — the Shekinah or
symbol of the Divine presence, as we suppose. There was a
real voice issuing out of the cloud. In one Avord, the transac-
tion, in all its parts and concomitants, was a reality, not a mere
scenic representation, or a mere impression produced upon the
minds of the apostles without a corresponding outward reality.
It was, however, an unearthly reality, and consequently could
THE TRANSFIGURATION. 167
be nothing else tlian an actual appearing of the Son of Man in
his form of glory, just as he will appear at his second coming
in his kingdom. These three apostles, therefore, did see the
Son of Man coming, i. e. as he will come, in his kingdom,
although they did not see the kingdom come.
Thus we are to understand John i. 14: "And we beheld his
glory — the glory as of the only begotten of the Father;" and
2 Pet. i. 16, 17: "For we have not followed cunningly devised
fables, when we made known unto you the poiver and coming of
our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eye-witnesses of his majesty."
This apostle evidently refers to some account he had previously
given to the persons he was writing to, of the transfiguration,
after our Lord's resurrection, and he proceeds : " For he
received from God the Father honour and glory, when there
came such a voice to him from the excellent glory. This is my
beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." Peter felt no diffi-
culty in calling the transfiguration "the power and coming,"
or, "the coming in power" of our Lord Jesus Christ, nor in
saying that he Avas an eye-witness of his majesty, when he
beheld hira transfigured, attended by Moses and Elijah, and
overshadowed by the cloud, or symbol of the Divine presence.
And to remove all ambiguity as to what he referred to, he adds :
"And this voice which came from heaven we heard when we
were with him in the holy mount.''
If the connection of thought be that before suggested, and
if the object of the Saviour was to teach these favoured disci-
ples, by an ocular demonstration, the mystery of his glorifica-
tion, in connection with the mystery of his death and resurrec-
tion, there w\as no other event to which this promise of the
Saviour could refer; for none of them, it is unnecessary to
observe, lived to see the actual coming and establishment of his
kingdom over the earth. And if this was not the Saviour's
purpose, what could it be ? Upon Dr. Whitby's hypothesis,
what object could the Saviour have in telling the disciples in so
obscure a manner, that one of their number should survive the
destruction of Jerusalem ? Would that strengthen or encourage
them to take up the cross and follow him ; to deny themselves ;
to renounce all the hopes they had cherished of a kingdom to
be possessed without shame or suffering? That the motive we
have suggested is worthy of the Saviour to hold out, is proved
by Heb. xii. 2. Any other interpretation, especially Dr. Whit-
by's, dislocates the verse from its natural connections, and
deprives the promise of any perceptible motive or meaning.
But, it will be inquired. Why did the Saviour express himself
so vaguely, if he secretly intended to fulfil the promise, within
the compass of a week ? " There be some standing here that
168 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of Man coming in
his kingdom." These expressions would be natural, if applied
to an event known or believed to be remote, but would they be
so, if applied to an event known to be so near ?
This form of expression no doubt influenced Dr. "Whitby. It
has served, with many commentators, to divert the mind from
the event the Saviour intended, and this so far from being an
objection, is a further reason for applying the promise to the
transfiguration. For consider, the transfiguration Avas the most
private of all our Lord's miracles. Three only, of the twelve
apostles, were permitted to witness it. It was designed to be
kept a secret until after the Lord's resurrection. Matthew and
Mark say that he expressly charged them not to speak of it,
till that event. Luke does not mention this charge, but merely
says, that " they kept it silent and did not speak of it to any
man in those days." Now, such being the purpose of the
Saviour, we may suppose that if he spoke of it at all, he would
do so only in a very indistinct, indefinite way. He would not
say particularly that some of them should see him assume his
form of glory, and call to his presence two of the departed saints.
Nor would he definitely announce the time when he purposed to
fulfil the promise. He would not say, within a week or within a
year some of you shall see the Son of Man coming in his king-
dom. For, when the tim.e had elapsed, there would be an
inquiry among them, who had seen the fulfilment of the Lord's
promise. The apostles, it need not be said, were inquisitive.
They had much conversation together, and sometimes disputes.
James and John excited the displeasure of their companions, by
an ambitious request. It is unnecessary to add, the Saviour
understood their characters perfectly. He knew their weak-
nesses and faults, and shaped his conduct with consummate skill
and prudence. Had it been known which were the favoured
disciples, might not the others have felt grieved ? See Matt.
XX. 20 — 28. Perhaps the favour shown to James and John, in
admitting them to see the transfiguration, emboldened them to
ask for pre-eminence in the kingdom. However this may be,
our Lord, by so indefinite a promise, gave no occasion to those
whom he did not intend thus to favoui*, to make any inquiry
about its fulfilment, and thus Peter, James, and John, were not
known to be the favoured ones, until after our Lord had risen
from the dead. Then an entirely new order of things com-
menced. By the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, they were all
taught very different views of the kingdom from those they had
previously entertained. Their envy and ambition were extin-
guished, and the eight not favoured, rejoiced heartily in the
favour shown to the three.
THE TRANSFIGURATION. 169
Now a promise made with such objects in view, as it would
necessarily be indefinite in its terms, would naturally produce
the same effect upon the minds of commentators as it did upon
the minds of the apostles at that time. None of the apostles
then knew what the Lord intended. Afterwards they did, and
the method which the Evangelists took to remove the obscurity,
was to narrate, in immediate connection, the promise and fulfil-
ment. The connection comments on the words.
Matt. xvii. 1. "And after six days Jesus taketh Peter,
James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into a high
mountain apart by themselves." Mark ix. 2 ; Luke ix. 28.
Luke says it was " about an eight days after these words" —
meaning perhaps not only the promise but the whole discourse,
of which the promise was the conclusion — in which computation
he includes the day on which the promise was made, and also
the day of the transfiguration, whereas Matthew and Mark
exclude both these days; so that there is no discrepancy
between the Evangelists. It is more important, however, to
notice the particularity with which all of them denote the
interval of time. According to Dr. Whitby's interpretation,
and, indeed, qjiy other than that before stated, this precise
notation of the time can serve no other purpose than that of
denoting the order of its occurrence. The Evangelists might
as well have said {[xera xauva) after tliese things, or [xac eyeusTo)
it came to pa.ss {/isza zaova) after these things, which are the
phrases they generally use. The design of this particularity
we suggest, as before, is to connect the promise, in Matt. xvi.
28, with the transfiguration as its fulfilment. Thus understood,
it shows how the Lord hastened to allay the severity of his
rebuke to Peter by this extraordinary privilege, and how soon
he practically taught these favoured disciples to look through
and beyond the sufferings and ignominy he must endure, to the
glory which would follow. 1 Pet. i. 11.
And here, it is proper to observe, that our Lord exhibited
different degrees of evidence of his Divine nature and glory to
different persons. To his disciples generally, he exhibited more
than to the multitudes — to the twelve apostles more than to
his other disciples — to Peter, James, and John, more than to
the rest of the twelve, and perhaps to Peter more than to James
or John. Certain it is, that Peter was distinguished by the
Father above his fellow apostles, in being first taught the mys-
tery of the incarnation, as has been remarked upon Matt. xvi.
17 ; and the reader need not be reminded, that there were
especial reasons why one of the twelve should not be a sharer
in the extraordinary favours of his Master. See John vi. 70.
It is noticeable, also, that while the Evangelists arc precise
99
170 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
in denoting the time, they are very indefinite in respect to the
"place of the transfiguration. Matthew and Mark describe it as
a high mountain, Luke calls it "the mountain," as though he
had reference to some particular mountain, but does not inti-
mate what mountain. Jerome who died a.d. 420, at the age of
80, that is nearly 400 years after this event (Ad Eustochiam
Epitaph. Paulie,) has preserved the traditionary opinion or
belief that Mount Tabor was the mountain referred to by the
Evangelists. Josephus says that Tabor was in Galilee, twenty
leagues and more from Cfesarea Philippi; and from Mark,
ix. 30, we may infer that our Lord was not in Galilee when he
rejoined his other disciples the next day. Luke ix. 37.
Others suppose our Lord was transfigured upon Mount
Panium, situated at the fountains of Jordan, near the foot of
which Coesarea Philippi was built. See Lamy's Harmony.
This opinion also rests upon conjecture. None of the apostles,
except Peter, James, and John, knew the mountain until after
the resurrection of our Lord. Whether they spoke of it after-
wards definitely to others, we do not know, but the apostle
Peter when writing of it, 2 Pet. i. 18, is not more definite than
the Evangelists, and John, i. 14, when referring to the trans-
figuration, makes no allusion whatever to the place where it
occurred. This obscurity was designed in order, perhaps, that
no occasion should be given to the superstitious practices which
it was foreseen would have followed, if the Evangelists had
definitely marked the spot of this most wonderful transaction.
Matt. xvii. 2. " And was transfigured before them."
It will be useful before proceeding further, to collect from
the three Evangelists, and arrange in their order, all the
circumstances attending the transfiguration. This we have
attempted to do as follows. But the reader should attempt it
for himself. (1) Our Lord ascends the mountain to pray, as
Luke informs us, ix. 28, attended by Peter, James, and John ;
(2) while in the act of prayer, his person is transfigured, or, as
Luke expresses it, the appearance of his face was altered or
became (extpov, another) changed. His face shone as the sun.
His garments became white as light (Matt.) — [white exceed-
ingly as snow, shining, such as no fuller could make them
(Mark) — white and glistering (Luke)]. In the meantime, Peter,
James, and John, had become heavy with sleep, and probably
did not witness the change at its commencement. (3) Moses
and Elias then appear in glory. (4) The disciples awaking,
Luke ix. 32, perceive the change m the Lord's person ; — they
perceive, also, the presence of Moses and Elias in glorified
forms. (5) The disciples hear the conversation of the Lord
with Moses and Elias about his approaching [i^odovy Luke
THE TRANSFIGURATION. 171
ix. 31) exodus from his state of humiliation at Jerusalem.
(6) The conversation ceases, and Moses and Elias are in the act
■ of departing. (7) Peter perceiving it, as we may suppose, makes
the most extraordinary display of his character on record. He
ventures to speak, as if unawed by the presence of such glorious
and majestic forms. (8) Before Peter had done speaking, a
cloud (probably the Shekinah) suddenly overshadowed them.
Matthew calls it a light or bright cloud. According to some
readings, it was a cloud of light. (9) Meantime (that is, while
Peter was speaking) Moses and Elias disappear, so that the
presence of the cloud succeeded the presence of Moses and
Elias. (10) As the cloud enveloped the disciples, they were
filled with fear. Luke ix. 34. (11) Instantly the voice of the
Father issues from the cloud, " This is my beloved Son, hear
ye him." See notes on Matt. iii. 17. As Moses and Elias had
previously departed, the disciples could not doubt that the
meaning of the voice was to be applied to Jesus. (12) Hear-
ing the voice, the disciples fell on their faces. Matt. xvii. 6.
(13) While they thus lay prostrate, the cloud also disappears;
(14) and with the departure of the cloud, Jesus, by an act of his
pwn power, as we suppose, resumed his former appearance.
(15) Going then to his disciples, he touched them, bid them
rise and not fear. (16) Then they arose, and looking round
(perhaps to see again those glorious forms, Mark ix. 8) they
perceived that Moses and Elias had departed, that the cloud
had disappeared, that Jesus was no longer transfigured, but
the same as when he ascended the mountain with them and
began to pray.
Thus, a succession of testimonies to the mystery of our
Lord's person was furnished by this most wonderful transaction.
The transfiguration of his person into the appearance of such
majesty, was of itself an overpowering testimony to his glory
as the Son of Man. Then the appearing of Moses and
Elias, and their conversing with him about his decease or
transition from humiliation to his former glory, was another
amazing testimony to the glory of his nature, as the Son of
Man. Having accomplished the object of their mission,
nothing remained to detain them longer, and they departed.
The crowning testimony of all followed : — it was the testimony
of the Father himself. In order to this, the mysterious cloud
appears, as soon as Moses and Elias disappear, and while Jesus
with the three disciples only, were within it, the voice is
uttered, " This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
Hear ye him." No greater testimony than this could be
given. Then the cloud also disappears, and the transfiguration
is passed.
172 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
Many questions are suggested by this wonderful transaction,
but we must not too curiously inquire into a matter so pro-
foundly mysterious. There can be no doubt that there were
reasons for ordering the whole scene exactly in the way it
occurred, although we should not be able to discover them. We
may safely believe, however, that none are so probable as those
which tend most to exalt the majesty and glory of the manhood
of our blessed Lord. As to the transfiguration itself, we are
inclined to regard it as a temporary display or revealing of the
concealed glory of his person ; or, as an outward manifestation
or uncovering, for a little space, of the inherent glory of his
manhood. John xvii. 5. See notes on Matt. xiv. 22 — 33.
We call the transfiguration a miracle, an(J such it was. But
his return from his transfigured, or glorified, to his inglorious
form, is not commonly regarded in the same light. Yet, if we
consider the essentially inherent glory of our Lord's person, it
was, perhaps, a greater miracle to conceal it under the humble
veil of his flesh, and keep it concealed, except so far as his
miracles occasionally displayed it, from his incarnation to his
resurrection, than to uncover or reveal it, as he did on the
occasion which we are considering. We add a few observations
upon some parts of this narrative.
Luke ix. 29. "And as he prayed," &c.
The Evangelist does not mention the subject of his prayer,
but as he ascended the mountain to make this display of his
glory, we may reasonably conclude that his prayer had respect
to it. If this supposition be admitted, it would follow that his
prayer was the appointed means for that end, and as faith or
implicit trust in God is the life and energy of prayer, we may
conclude that the transfiguration of the human person of the
Lord Jesus was wrought through that means. See John xvii. 5.
Our Lord's faith, as a man, was perfect. It took hold of God,
and drew from God whatsoever he asked, John xi. 41, 42, being
always agreeable to the Divine will. Matt. xxvi. 53, 54.
Luke ix. 30. "And behold there talked with him two men,
which were Moses and Elias, who, appearing in glory, spake
of his decease [e^ro^ov,] which he should accomplish [7T?.yjpouu^
at Jerusalem."
The Evangelist is very explicit. Two men, not angels,
appeared, and these men were Moses and Elias. It was not,
then, a scenic representation merely, but the real appearing of
two departed saints, in forms of glory, sent to earth from the
heavenly world expressly to hold this interview with the
Saviour. They talked with him in audible, intelligible words,
which the three apostles heard and understood. The subject of
their discourse was the same our Lord had, for the first time,
THE TRANSFIGURATION. 173
broached to his disciples a week before, namely, his sufferings
and death at Jerusalem. Moses and Elias knew the purpose
of the Lord's humiliation, and the place of its termination or
accomplishment. They spoke of his decease (decession, de-
cessus, i^odou,) or departure, at Jerusalem. The identity of
the subject confirms the interpretation of the promise before
suggested. Matt. xvi. 28. It is as though our Lord had assumed
temporarily his glory, to repeat, in Peter's hearing, the very
things at which that apostle had revolted, in order to show him
how differently these saints regarded them.
However this may be, we may regard our Lord's brief inter-
course with these departed saints, as a type, or exhibition on a
small scale, of the society and intercourse between him and his
redeemed in his kingdom. In this sense, it was a fulfilment of
his promise; for it was an open manifestation of himself,
as Son of Man, in the glory with which he will appear in his
kingdom.
Matt. xvii. 4. "Then answered Peter and said. Lord, it is
good for us to be here. If thou wilt, let us make three taber-
nacles : one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias."
Peter evidently regarded his Master as the greater of the
three glorious persons before him. Whether his glory sur-
passed that of the others, or whether the manner of their
address and demeanour convinced him of it, we are not in-
formed. Nor are we told how he could know one departed
saint from another. The fact only is recorded, and it seems to
argue either that the apostles were, for the occasion, gifted with
new powers of discernment, or that these saints made them-
selves known to the apostles by some extraordinary power
which they possessed. 1 Cor. xiii. 12. But ^the transaction is
too mysterious to be reasoned about. It belongs to the invi-
sible world, or rather to the times of the kingdom yet to
be revealed.
We cannot leave this passage without calling the reader's
attention again, for a moment to the character of the apostle.
He was in a scene of unearthly glory. Before him stood the
Son of Man, attended by the greatest of the prophets, and all
three attired with the splendour of the heavenly world. Who
but Peter would dare to utter a voice or mingle his words with
theirs in such a scene ! It is obvious to remark that he neither
appreciated the nature nor the object of the transaction, nor the
character nor condition of the persons before him. Evidently
he was awe-struck and bewildered. Luke ix. 33 ; Mark ix. 6.
In that there is no marvel. The marvel is that he should speak
at all. The character of Peter, in this respect, is unique. No
such record as this is made of any other man.
174 ' NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
One observation more upon the whole of this passage, Matt.
xvii. 1 — 8, and the instruction it was intended to convey. We
have eye-witnesses of the sufferings and death of the Lord
Jesus ; eye-witnesses of his person after his resurrection ; eye-
witnesses of his ascension ; and eye-witnesses of his glorified
person, and of the manner of his intercourse with the saints in
glory ; but not in this order : for the Divine purpose did not
permit of the Lord's return to the earth after his final ascen-
sion, until he should come in his kingdom. Acts iii. 21. Hence
he appeared in his glory for a little space, during the period of
his humiliation, and two of the most eminent saints of the
former dispensation were sent to hold converse with him, in
the presence of three of his disciples, in order that the Church
might have, through their testimony, out of order and before
the appointed time, an example or outward manifestation of
the kingdom, and of the hope to which his elect people are
called. In this view of the transfiguration, it was a most
gracious provision for the comfort and encouragement of the
Church in her pilgrimage through this world. See Heb. xii. 2,
22, 23 ; xiii. 13, 14 ; 1 Pet. i. 10—18. For by thus teaching
the mystery of our Lord's glorification in connection with the
mystery of his death, it marvellously joined the sufi'erings of
the cross with the kingdom and the crown.
Matt. xvii. 9. " And as they came down from the moun-
tain, Jesus charged them, saying, Tell the vision [what things
they had seen, Mark ix. 9] to no man, until the Son of Man be
risen [again] from the dead."
From this verse we infer that the instruction to be derived
from the transfiguration was designed for the Church. No
purpose connecteijr; with our Lord's personal ministry among
the Jews was to be served by it. We may observe also that
the Lord's resurrection from the dead was the epoch, very
nearly, of his entering permanently into his glory, Luke
xxiv. 26, so that the injunction in effect was, not to speak of
this temporary glorification of the Lord's person so long as he
continued in his state of humiliation, nor until he was ready to
pour out the spirit of glory upon his followers.* We have no
* The author of an interesting little treatise, lately published by the Pres-
byterian Board of Publication, entitled, "The Last Days of Jesus," supposes
the mountain in Galilee, mentioned in Matt, xxviii. 16, was the mountain on
which the Lord was transfigured, and that the appearance in Galilee "was a
substantial reproduction of the transfiguration scene." In this way he accounts
for the two opposite effects produced: " some worshipped and some doubted."
In this conjecture, we think, the author mistakes the object of the Saviour's
appearance after his resurrection, which was to establish the reality of
the fact of the resurrection of the very body of flesh which was crucified,
THE TRANSFIGURATION. 175
evidence that the disciples revealed the secret until after the
day of Pentecost, but one use they then made of it may be
learned from the second epistle of Peter, the leading doctrine
of which is the second coming of the Lord.
Both the vision, or what they had just seen, and the rising
from the dead, are here predicated of the Son of Man. It was
the glory of his manhood which they had seen in the transfigura-
tion, and it was as Son of Man that he was to rise from the
dead and ascend into heaven, John vi. 62, and thereupon to
enter permanently into the glory in which they had just seen
him. The prohibition amounts to this: that the disciples were
not to speak of this temporary glorification of the Son of Man,
so long as he should continue in his state of humiliation. Why
this injunction was made, we can only conjecture. But the
injunction itself proves that no use could be made of the vision,
consistently with the Divine plan, during our Lord's personal
ministry among the Jews ; and the implied permission to speak
of it after his resurrection, shows that the instruction it con-
veyed was intended for the Church. It is not probable that the
three disciples at that time understood either the motives for
secresy, or when, or by what means, they would be absolved
from it. For Mark, ix. 10, observes that, though they kept it
faithfully among themselves, they did not so much as under-
stand what the rising of the Son of Man from the dead could
mean. See John xx. 9.
and for that purpose alone St. Paul uses it, 1 Cor. xv. 5, 6, the evidence of
■which would be impaired by transfiguration. Besides it seems impossible that
St. Peter would refer to the transfiguration in the special manner he does,
2 Pet. i. 16 — 18, if the same transactioa had been repeated afterwards in the
presence of the whole body of (or more than five hundred of) the disciples.
If the Lord had been twice transfigured, there would be the same reason for
recording both, and we cannot give any reason why the last should be myste-
riously concealed, and the first be circumstantially recorded. It may be suffi-
cient to say, however, that this opinion or conjecture is without evidence, and
the estimable author referred to, it may be presumed, regarded it in that
light.
176 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
CHAPTER V.
The coming of Elias. — Casting out Demons. — The Apostles' want of Faith for
Miracles. — The Faith for working Miracles. — Jesus as Son of Man and as
Christ. — Jesus as Son of Man and as Messiah. — Christ's Kingdom as Mes-
siah.— Christ's paying Tribute — The Apostles ask, Who shall be greatest? —
Those like little Children to be greatest. — Little Children saved. — The Son of
Man came to save the Lost. — Contending Brethren to be Reconciled. — Sense
of the word Church. — Binding and Loosing. — The Discipline of the Church. —
The Regeneration, — The New Heavens and the New Earth. — The Apostles to
sit on Thrones. — All Believers to receive Rewards. — Christ foretells his Cruci-
fixion.
Matthew xvii. 10. "And his disciples asked him, saying,
Why then say the Scribes, that Elias must first come?"
This verse should be read, or at least be interpreted, with the
8th verse. Thus : "And when they had lifted up their eyes,
they saw no man, save Jesus only. And his disciples asked
him, saying, Why then say the Scribes that Elias must first
come?" This question was suggested by the disappearance of
Elias, and it implies a doubt whether the doctrine of the Scribes
was true. The disciples knew that Jesus was the Messiah. The
transfiguration proved it beyond the possibility of a doubt.
Elias had just appeared to Jesus, but he had departed, and
Jesus was now returning to his ministry among the people.
Besides, if this brief appearance of Elias could be considered
the "coming" taught by the Scribes, still Elias did not come
first. How then could the doctrine of the Scribes be true?
Such was the reasoning, as we suppose, suggested by the
vision.
The reply of our Lord to the question, confirmed this doc-
trine of the Scribes, and at the same time vindicated his title
to the Messiahship.
Matt. xvii. 11. "And Jesus answered and said unto them,
Elias truly cometh first, [as the Scribes say,] and [when he
shall come] he will restore all things."
As if he had said: "Nothing that you have seen or heard
contradicts, or conflicts with this doctrine of the Scribes. For,
at the coming of which they speak, Elias will really appear to
this people, and restore all things to their former state; and
this is a note or mark by which the coming of Elias, foretold by
the prophets, may be certainly known. The coming of Elias at
my transfiguration was designed for an altogether different pur-
pose. It was not foretold by any prophet, nor have the Scribes
any idea of the coming of Elias, which you have seen. Nor
must you even speak of it to them, or to any other person, until
after my ministry to this people shall be ended."
THE COMING OF ELIAS. 177
This part of our Lord's answer, then, had respect to the
futurity of the nation, and by it he taught the disciples that
the doctrine of the Scribes, so considered, was true. They had
visible evidence that all things had not been restored, and, con-
sequently, that the appearing and departing of Elias, which
•they had witnessed, without so much as showing himself to the
people, nor to them except for a few moments, could not be
the coming of Elias taught by the Scribes. But, if our Lord
had concluded his answer with these words, the perplexity of
the disciples would have been increased; for, how then could
he be the Messiah, if the doctrine of the Scribes were true,
seeing that Elias had not yet appeared and restored all things?
Would not the Lord's answer have been equivalent to a confes-
sion that he was not the Messiah, although the vision proved
that he was, and the voice of the Father commanded them to
obey him as such ?
To anticipate any doubt which might arise from a simple con-
firmation of the doctrine of the Scribes, he added:
Matt. xvii. 12. "But I say unto you, that Elias is come
already and they knew him not, but have done unto him what-
soever they listed."
By these words our Lord vindicates his Messiahship, and
reconciles the teachings of the vision with the doctrine of the
Scribes. Elias had come in person, but not to restore all things.
Yet why should he come for any purpose, if Jesus were not the
Messiah ? Of this coming of Elias, the Scribes neither knew
nor taught anything. Further: John the Baptist had so far
fulfilled the office of Elias as to vindicate his title to the Mes-
siahship, and that, too, consistently with the sense of these
Scriptures from which the Scribes derived their doctrine. Isaiah
xl. 3; Mai. iii. 1.
Yet John did not restore all things. His ministry was not
only unsuccessful, but he suffered at their hands. How then
could John be the Elias who shall restore all things at his com-
ing? The disciples must have felt that something was wanting
to make the explanation complete ; but they acquiesced in it as
satisfactory upon the ground of the vision and the authority of
their Master; for he did not enter into any elucidation of his
meaning, much less explain how it could be that Elias was yet
to come and restore all things, and yet had already come and
been rejected and put to death by the nation.
The truth is, the disciples were unable, at that time, to com-
prehend the explanation of the matter. They could not believe,
or even conceive, that the Messiah would be rejected and put to
death. Matt. xvi. 22; Mark ix. 32; Luke ix. 45; xviii. 34.
They knew not what he meant by the saying, " till the Son of
23
178 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
Man be risen from the dead." Mark ix. 10; John xx. 9. Con-
sequently they thought of the Lord's advent at that time as
his successful and only advent. Could they have conceived of
two advents of the Messiah — the first to suffer, and the second
to reign — the solution of any doubt arising from the Lord's
answer, would have been easy. " It would have been obvious to
conclude that each advent might, in the Divine purpose, require
a harbinger ; and thus the doctrine of the Scribes concerning
the future coming and successful ministry of Elias, would be
consistent with the divine mission of John and the Messiahship
of our Lord. It is proper to add, that the prophecies concern-
ing John the Baptist and Elias, Isa. xl. 3; Mai. iii. 1; iv. 5, 6,
are couched in such terms that they may be applied to one or
two forerunners; or, in other words, so that John might be
concealed, if we may so express it, under the drapery of Elias.
Certain it is, our Lord did not say John was really Elias, (juxta
fidem corporis, to use Jerome's words;) but, that he fulfilled the
office of Elias at that time, and in that sense might be called
Elias, as has already been shown in the preceding notes. See
notes on John i. 22, 23; Matt. iii. 1, 3; xi. 2—15.
Matt. xvii. 12. " Likewise shall also the Son of Man suffer
of them."
By these words our Lord again foretells his rejection by the
nation, linking the issue of his own ministry with that of John's.
Mark, ix. 13, represents him as saying that John's sufferings
were predicted by the prophets. But by which of them, and
where ? This is considered by some commentators a point of
difficulty. Some have resorted to the expedient of transposing
the words "as it is written of him," in the end of the 13th
verse, so as to make them the third clause. "But I say unto
you, that Elias is indeed come, as it is ivritten of him, and they
have done unto him whatsoever they listed." See Whithy and
Scott. But there is no ancient version or MS. which justifies
the transposition. Euthymius says that Isaiah predicted the
sufferings of John, but he does not cite the place. In the mar-
gin, the 49th chapter of Isaiah is referred to, but Jansenius
[Harmony, 502, Col. 2) found nothing in that chapter which he
could so interpret.*
* According to some MSS., and the Vulgate and Syriac versions, the 12th
verse of Mark ix. should be read thus : " Elias verily cometh first and restoreth
all things, and [as it has been wriiicn, Kctbeec yir)pa.7rrtu, of the Son of Man) that
he may sufler many things and be set at nought;" that is, kuBui; is read instead
of 3-aic, and the whole phrase may then be read parenthetically. See Gries-
bach, Knappius, Mill, Beausobre and L'Enfant's version. Adopting this read-
ing, the verse may be paraphrased thus: "And he answered and told them,
Elias indeed cometh before the Christ, as the Scribes teach ; and at his coming
he will restore all things. But Elias cometh also that he may suffer, and be
set at nought, as it has been written (xafiai; yryjiaTrrou) of the Son of Man. This
THE COMING OF ELIAS. 179
The true explanation appears to be, that the person and
ministry of our blessed Lord were so bound together in the Di-
vine purpose, with the person and ministry of John, so far as
they respected that people at that time, in their national capa-
city, that whatsoever was written expressly of the rejection of
the Lord Jesus, as the Messiah, was virtually written of John
as hisc herald; and hence it is that our Lord, in this passage,
Mark ix. 13, combined and compared, in the same breath, John's
rejection and suifering with his own ; alleging, as he did, that
such was the sense of the prophecies. See the notes on Matt,
xi. 2—15; iii. 3; Luke iii. 20, 21.
Matt. xvii. 11. "And restore all things."
At the time our Lord addressed these words to the three
apostles, the things to be restored or the desolations to be
repaired did not appear. The Jewish Commonwealth was still
in existence; the country and cities, though subject to the
Roman power, were flourishing. The Levitical worship was
observed; they had their gorgeous temple, their synagogues,
their teachers, and rulers. Their State was yet to become one
vast ruin. The people were yet to be scattered among all
nations, as the necessary consequence in the Divine plan of the
smiting of their true Shepherd, Matt. xxvi. 31, and be sub-
jected to a long and galling captivity, during which great diver-
sities would be wrought in their character.* From this dis-
persion they were to be restored and reconstituted into a Com-
monwealth again, before the work of Elias could begin. Both
Peter (Acts iii. 21) and James (Acts xv. 16,) after they received
the Scribes do not teach, for they do not understand the prophecies they under-
take to explain. Moreover I say unto you that Elias has indeed already come,
and they knew him not, and what they listed, that they did to him; as it is
virtually written of him in the prophecies concerning the Messiah. In like
manner, the Son of Man is about to suffer by their hands."
These last words pointed so plainly to John the Baptist, that our Lord's
allusion could not be mistaken. Matt. xvii. 13. Still, the mystery was not
cleared up to the apprehension of the apostles, for the reasons suggested
above; for they were not at that time capable of understanding how much was
involved in "the restitution of all things," nor the means through which so great
an event was to be accomplished.
* It is plain from the question the disciples put to the Lord at his last
interview with them, "Lord, wilt thou at this time restore the kingdom to
Israel?" Acts i. 6, they had no idea that the Roman power was yet to be exerted
to the utter ruin of their Commonwealth, and bring them into a captivity,
which was to endure more than twenty-five times longer than their captivity
under the kings of the ancient Babylon ; and it maybe observed that the Jews
in general so construed their Scriptures that they saw predicted in them but
one captivity under one Babylon — but one return from Babylon — one advent of
Elias — one advent of Messiah, and that his advent of glory and power in his
kingdom. Whereas, in fact, two oppressing Babylons were foretold, and two
returns from captivity, two advents of Elias, and two advents of Messiah ; yet
but one kingdom.
180 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
the gift of inspiration, refer to this restitution in which Elias
is to perform a part, as future. The apostle James represents
it, on the authority of. the prophecy of Amos, ix. 11, 12, as
following the work of taking out of the Gentiles an elect peo-
ple for Christ, Acts xv. 16 ; that is, the present dispensation
of the Gospel among the Gentiles for the gathering and com-
pletion of the Church.
But we suppose, and so understand the apostle, that the pro-
phecy of Amos has respect rather to the spiritual upbuilding
of Israel, than to the rebuilding of their wasted cities and the
reconstruction of their political or national State. The restora-
tion of Israel to their land, according to the Scriptures, is to
be brought about by other means than the ministry of Elias.
Isa. Ixi. 4; Deut. xxviii. 49 — fc)6; xxx. 1 — 6; Isa. xi. ; xlix.
22, 23; Ix.; Ixi. 4 — 7; Jer. xxxiii. 5 — 8; xxxi.; Ezek. xxxiv.,
xxxvi., xxxvii., xxxviii., xxxix. ; Hos. iii. 4, 5; and many
other places. Elias will not, as we conceive, have anything to
do in the preparatory work of their political restoration. At
his coming, he will find Israel, to a considerable extent, though
perhaps not wholly, restored to their land, their cities rebuilt,
and their State reconstructed, and the people endeavouring,
perhaps, to worship God according to the law of Moses. In
these circumstances we can conceive there will be occasion for
the ministry of some great prophet, to be attended with greater
power than John's was. Mai. iv. 5, 6.
The question concerning the future mission of Elias seems,
therefore, to be intimately, if not inseparably, connected with
the restoration of Israel to the land God gave to Abraham.
If the Scriptures teach that Israel will be thus restored, we
can perceive no reason why God should not send them a
prophet after their restoration, endued with powers which shall
insure, Mai. iv. 5, 6, the success of his ministry. And if he
sent Elias in any sense before our Lord entered on his ministry
of humiliation, why should he not send Elias (or an Elias) to
them after their restoration ? There appears to be no more
reason for understanding the Scriptures relating to the future
coming of Elias figuratively, than there is of understanding the
prophecies relating to the restoration of Israel figuratively.
Yet many persons are ready to admit the latter who deny the
former. But if the prophecies concerning their restoration
signify nothing more than their conversion to the Gospel, and
their being gathered into Christian Churches in the lands where
they now dwell, the principles of interpretation by which we
reach such a conclusion, would justify us in understanding the
prophecy concerning the sending of Elijah, Mai. iv. 5, 6, as
meaning nothing more or different from the outpouring of the
THE COMING OF ELIAS. 181
Holy Spirit upon that people in their dispersed and dissociate
condition. What need would there then be of the coming of
Elias in person ? What would be the use of his ministry ?
What would he have to restore ? Where would he appear ?
Where would he find all Israel ? The field of his mission would
b6 the world. Again: Would he find the people converted?
If so, why need Elias be sent to them in person ? Would he
find them unconverted ? It is the work of the Holy Spirit to
convert men during this dispensation by means of the gospel
ministry. Why then should Elias be sent with the power of
the same Spirit to supersede the ordinary ministry of preach-
ing and the appointed means of grace? Such are the specu-
lative questions suggested by the spiritualizing scheme of
interpretation.
On the other hand, if Ave adopt the conclusion that Israel
will be restored to their land, at the termination of this dis-
pensation of the Gospel and the proximate coming of the Son
of Man, none of these questions can arise. For, entertaining
this view, we should expect to see the wasted cities of Israel
literally rebuilt — their now empty land actually filled with
people — its vales, and hills, and mountains cultivated again,
and places for the worship of God erected. In one word, we
can admit, without hesitation, that all the prophecies relating
to what that people will be and do, or to what God will do for
them (including even this prophecy of sending Elijah to them,)
will be literally and punctually fulfilled. And as they have
respect to a future dispensation of God's government over the
world, it does not concern us of the Gentiles now to contend for
a spiritual interpretation of them, as though they concerned
the Christian Church, any more than it concerned the Jews of
our Lord's day to know what God would do for or with the
Gentiles after the Levitical dispensation expired. The fact
that many Christian writers have done so, has been the occa-
sion of throwing obscurity on other points of practical concern
and even of serious error. Indeed, it is not possible, as we
conceive, to reach such a result except by principles and modes
of reasoning which leave no fact secure from cavil, no doctrine
from perversion, no part of the Bible safe from the attacks of
neologians and infidels.
Matt. xvii. 14—21. (Mark ix. 14—27 ; Luke ix. 37—42.)
Verse 16. " And I brought him to thy disciples, and they
could not cure him."
Yet the Lord had given these disciples power over unclean
spirits without exception, to cast them out; and power to heal
all manner of sickness and all manner of disease. Matt. x. 1, 8.
Why, then, could they not cast out the unclean spirit on this
182 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
occasion; they had exerted the power successfully before.
Mark vi. 13. Why could they not do so now? This was the
question the disciples themselves put to their Master, after
they had retired with him from the crowds, verse 19. He
ascribed their failure to their unbelief, verse 20. Yet when he
sent them forth to preach the kingdom, their faith was not
made a condition for the successful exercise of the powers con-
ferred. Even Judas is not excepted from this grant of miracu-
lous power, yet no one can suppose he had any real faith or
holiness. John vi. 71 ; xii. 6. Why, then, was faith necessary
on this occasion? We suggest the following answer to these
inquiries :
The miraculous powers with which the twelve apostles had
before been invested, were conferred with an especial view to
the mission on which they were then sent, and were confined to
that mission. The special design of this gift of powers was to
authenticate the proclamation they were commanded to make.
Matt. X. 7. So long as they were engaged in that mission, we
do not suppose they failed, or even could fail, in any attempt
to cure a disease, or cast out a demon of any kind ; because a
failure would have impaired the evidence of their proclamation.
The Divine honour and power were chiefly concerned in this
measure. It was God's testimony to the nation of the near
approach of his kingdom, and his own exhibition of the pre-
appointed evidence of the fact. Steadily, and with unerring
effect therefore, the power of the name of Jesus, when invoked
in execution of his command, see Matt. xii. 27, overcame all
the power of the enemy, without prayer or fasting, and even
irrespectively of faith, either in those who received the benefit
of the miracles or in the apostles who performed them. But
the apostles, as we learn from Mark vi. 30, returned from that
mission at the death of John the Baptist, and it does not appear
that they were afterwards sent forth to preach the kingdom
during our Lord's personal ministry. The special object of
this extraordinary gift of power having been accomplished, the
gift itself was withdrawn ; that is to say, they were put back
into the condition they were in, before they were sent forth to
proclaim the kingdom.
It is true that after the death of John the Baptist, seventy
other disciples were invested with similar powers, Luke x. 1 — 9,
in order to qualify them for another special mission. Here
it should be observed, the twelve .apostles were sent to all the
cities of Israel without exception. Matt. x. 6, 23. The seventy
disciples, on the other hand, were sent only to those cities and
places whither the Lord himself ivoidd come. Luke x. 1. This
is a difference important to be noticed. The apostles were sent
THE apostles' WANT OF FAITH FOR MIRACLES. 183
to proclaim the kingdom to the whole nation. Every city and
place of Israel was within the scope of their mission. The
seventy disciples were sent before the Lord to prepare his way,
and by their preaching and miracles to incline the minds of the
people to receive him. It was a gracious means designed to
prevent, if possible, the rejection of himself as the Son of Man
and the Saviour of the world, by any to whom he should after-
wards personally come. The seventy were commanded to
repeat and confirm the proclamation the twelve apostles had
made, Luke x. 9, 11, for the kingdom was still nigh to them as
individuals composing the nation, although it had been virtually
rejected by the nation itself, by the rejection of John the
Baptist. The power conferred on the seventy disciples, like
that conferred on the twelve apostles, appears to have been
unqualified, and in no respects dependent on their faith. Luke
X. 1(.
Apart, then, from a special design or purposg connected
with our Lord's official relations or functions, either as Messiah
or Son of Man, we do not suppose that any of the apostles or
disciples had power to work miracles, except through faith in
him; but with faith, some who did not join themselves to the
company of the disciples, could cast out devils in his name.
Luke X. 49 ; Mark ix. 39. And herein lies the force of our
Lord's remark, when that fact was mentioned to him by John :
"There is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that
can {dovTjasTac, shall be able to) lightly speak evil of me, —
because his faith, through which he alone can receive such
power, is a proof that he is one of mine." Mark ix. 39;
Luke ix. 50.
These considerations open to us the actual condition of the
apostles, in respect to miraculous powers, during our Lord's
personal ministry. From the time of their call until the time
they were commissioned and sent forth to preach the kingdom,
they had not power to perform miracles, except through faith ;
and it does not appear that they attempted, during this period
of their discipleship, to perform a miracle on any occasion.
From the time they were sent forth to preach the kingdom,
until their return from that mission at the death of John the
Baptist, they had the power to perform, in execution of their
mission, miracles of healing and miracles of power over demons ;
but this power, so to speak, was appended or made appurtenant
to the commission given them, and ceased when that commission
was fully executed. From that time onward to the close of our
Lord's personal ministry, they had not the power to perform a
miracle, except through faith in him ; and the power was not
conferred on them again until after our Lord's final ascension,
184 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
when tliey received the gifts of the Holy Spirit, and among
others, the gift of the faith, which at this time they had not.
Bearing these considerations in mind, we return to the text
before quoted. The nine disciples whom the Lord left behind,
when he ascended the mountain, failed through their want of
faith in Jesus, notwithstanding the many proofs he had given
them of his Divine nature and power. The wonderful works
they had themselves done by his command, to say nothing of
the other proofs he had given them of his nature and attributes,
should have wrought faith in them, if indeed faith could be pro-
duced by evidence of the most powerful and convincing kind.
Hence the severity of our Lord's reproof: "O faithless and
perverse generation, (addressing his disciples,) how long shall
I be with you? How long shall I bear with you?" They
attempted the miracle, relying, it is probable, on the success
they had while executing the commission they had lately ful-
filled. Evidently they were surprised by their failure. The
tone of their question indicates it. No doubt, at the commence-
ment of their mission, they were surprised at their success,
Luke X. 17, and the Lord, without explaining to them ivliy the
powers formerly conferred upon them had ceased, adapts his
answer to the condition in which they actually were at that
time, in which also they were to continue, until they should be
sent forth again upon a wider mission after his ascension, with
the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and the gift of true faith.
Matt. xvii. 19, 20. "Then came the disciples to Jesus
apart, and said. Why could we not cast him out? And Jesus
said unto them. Because of your unbelief: For verily I say
unto you, If ye have faith as a grain of mustard-seed, ye shall
say unto this mountain, [meaning, perhaps, the mountain from
which he had just descended,] Remove hence to yonder place,
and it shall remove; and nothing shall be impossible unto
you.''
This is a difficult passage to explain. The difficulty is to
determine what our Lord meant by " faith as a grain of mustard-
seed." We have many examples of persons who sought the
Lord for healing, with faith sufficient to receive the benefit they
sought; yet we have no reason to suppose they had the faith
requisite to perform a miracle in his name. The father who
besought him on this occasion is an example. Mark ix. 23, 24.
Had he the faith which our Lord described, and could he have
ejected the foul spirit from his child? Had the apostles less
faith than this father? That the father had some faith is
evident. Mark ix. 23, 24. Is all faith of the same kind ? Or
is there one kind of faith sufficient to receive a blessing from
the Saviour, but not sufficient to impart or convey a blessing
THE apostles' WANT OF FAITH FOR MIRACLES. 185
from the Saviour to another person, while there is another kind
of faith suflficient for both these purposes ? 1 Cor. xiii. 2.
That there is some ground for such distinctions may be
inferred from the fact before stated, and also from the cessation
of miracles in the Church; for otherwise the cessation of miracles
would prove the utter extinction of faith, and consequently, of
the Church itself. Let us adopt the distinction for a moment,
and proceed to consider how far it will serve to explain this
passage. The apostles were applied to on this occasion as the
knoivn disciples and ministers of the Lord Jesus. It is not
improbable that the father who brought his child to them, had
seen or heard of the miracles they had performed, verse 16, and
they essayed to act, as they acted before, in that character.
They failed in this attempt, because they had not the faith, as
his ministers, {actively) to fulfil the functions of their office. If
we consider our Lord's answer, in verse 17, as addressed to the
apostles in their ministerial character, and intended as a
reproof to them, we may find an intimation in it of the
deficiency with which they were especially chargeable. " How
long shall I be with you? how long shall I bear with you?"
As if he had said, " Must I for ever remain with you perform-
ing such signs and wonders as you have seen, which demon-
strate the glory of my person and the greatness of my power ?
Will ye never learn to know who I am, and to believe in me as
I am ? What other signs and wonders must I show you, if
those which you have seen do not convince you?" It is evi-
dent they did not properly appreciate the evidence they had of
his glory and majesty, and consequently their conceptions of
his nature and offices were low and grovelling. They had no
clear apprehension of his Deity, or of his power and glory as
Son of Man and Lord of the world. This deficiency unfitted
them for his active service as stewards and dispensers of his
Divine powers. To serve in this capacity they must needs have
a faith founded upon a clear apprehension of the nature, attri-
butes, and glorious majesty of their Master, as God-Man-
Messiah. But his incarnate and outwardly humble condition,
or the veil of his flesh, as the apostle expresses it, Heb. x. 20,
concealed the inherent and essential glory of his person almost
as eifectually from them as it did from the masses of the people,
and the veil continued until the cloud at last concealed his body
from their sight, on the day of his final ascension. Even Peter,
James, and John, who were witnesses of the transfiguration,
are not to be excepted from this remark. John xiii. 36, 38 ;
Mark x. 35 ; xiv. 50, 71 ; Luke xxii. 82; Matt, xviii. 3.
If we may adopt this view of the passage, the faith which
our Lord spoke of, had respect to the powers of his kingdom,
24
186 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
and to the apostles as his ministers in his kingdom, and dis-
pensers or channels for the dispensation of those powers. Such
faith is of too high a nature to be produced or wrought in man,
as he now is, by mere evidence. It is the product of the Holy
Spirit's power alone. Accordingly on the day of Pentecost the
apostles received it. Acts iii. 16, in such measure as the Divine
purposes at that time required. But the full exhibition of the
power of faith, as we may infer from the example our Lord
gives in this passage, (comp. 1 Cor. xiii. 2,) is not to be expected
during this order of things. The faith which feeds and sus-
tains the Church now, is more like the faith of the father who
besought the Saviour to heal his child, Mark ix. 22, 24, than
the active energizing principle which the Saviour describes and
will give to those whom he will make partners in his throne.
Rev. iii. 21. More adequate and realizing views of the majesty
and glory of the Lord, would, no doubt, impart unwonted
energy to the faith of the Church even in this dispensation ;
but whether such views will be attained before the coming of
the Lord, depends wholly upon the operations of the Holy
Spirit, for which we can only pray, with such faith as we now
have.
Matt. xvii. 21. "Howbeit this kind" [of demons, or this
kind or order of beings called demons] " goeth not out but by
prayer and fasting."
It seems extraordinary that our Lord, after ascribing such
power to faith, should seem to admit that any kind of foul
spirits could not be overcome by it. It seems extraordinary
also, that he should ascribe to prayer and fasting greater
powers than those he had ascribed to faith. Yet these are
deductions which some make from the text. In order to
interpret this passage we must rightly appreciate our Lord's
position as a teacher of such men as the apostles were at that
time. Their mistaken views on some points, and their utter
ignorance of coming and even impending events, have already
been frequently alluded to. In conveying instruction to them
he took them as they were, and expressed himself in such terms
as were best suited to their extremely limited powers of appre-
hension. Had he said to them, in plain language, that they
were about to pass into a new dispensation, entirely different
from that then existing, in which they would be subjected to a
new discipline, and receive new influences ; and that this dis-
pensation was to be introduced by his crucifixion, death, resur-
rection, and ascension into heaven, which would be followed by
the mission of the Holy Spirit, they would not have understood
him; for they could not so much as conceive of his rejection
and death. Such sayings " would have been hid from them,
THE FAITH FOR WORKING MIRACLES. 187
neither would they have known the things which were spoken."
Luke xviii. 34.
Our Lord, therefore, did not take this method, although his
allusion, in the words under consideration was, as we conceive,
to the dispensation of the Holy Spirit, Avhich he denotes by one
of its adjuncts, or ordinances. Fasting was not a part of the
discipline which our Lord appointed to his disciples. Indeed
it was his will and appointment that they should not fast while
he remained with them. Matt. ix. 14, 15; Mark ii. 19, 20.
But when he should be taken away from them, that is after his
ascension, then it was his will that they should fast as well as
pray. The allusion, though it may seem to us obscure, is to
post-ascension times, and the new order of things and discipline
which Avould then be established ; then, through prayer and
fasting, they would receive from the Holy Spirit the faith by
which they would be able to cast out this kind of demons. The
words of the Saviour are limited to the occasion and the ques-
tion he was answering ; or the case in hand. He declared the
cause of their failure in that particular instance ; leaving it to
them to infer that in all cases requiring the exercise of miracu-
lous power, the want of faith would be followed by the same
result.
In confirmation of this interpretation it may be added, that
it does not appear that any of the apostles did perform any
miracles after the death of John the Baptist, until they received
the gifts of the Spirit after our Lord's ascension ; and if we
consider the new posture of the nation in consequence of that
event, and the change in our Lord's ministry consequent upon
it, see notes on Matt. xiv. 10, we cannot perceive any reason,
arising from their official relations to the Lord Jesus, why they
should. It is probable they were his constant attendants on his
journeyings from place to place ; and when persons brought
their sick to be healed, the Lord himself was present to heal
them. The Evangelists uniformly represent him, and not his
disciples, as performing the cures. On the occasion in ques-
tion, nine of the apostles were for a short time separated from
their Master. It was an extraordinary occurrence, brought
about by an extraordinary design or occasion. We do not
know that they were separated as long, at any time afterwards,
until they fled from him in the garden of Gethsemane. Matt.
xxvi. 56 ; Mark xiv. 50.
The passage is regarded by all interpreters as very obscure,
and the foregoing interpretation, if not satisfactory, may sug-
gest one which is so. At least it seems preferable to that which
ascribes the failure of the apostles to the neglect of a practice
which they were not required at that time to observe — a prac-
188 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
tice which, for some reason, it was not proper or possible for
them to observe. Mark ii. 19. Indeed, if the reader will duly
consider what has been said in the note on verse 16, and the
other notes therein referred to, he will not hastily reject this
interpretation.
Matt. xvii. 22, 23. "And while they abode in Galilee,
Jesus said unto them, the Son of Man [tnx -p Ben Adam, Ps.
viii. 6] shall be betrayed into the hands of men, [t2"'r:5« '^T'n
bidi miasJuni] and they shall kill him, and the third day he
shall be raised again." Mark ix. 31.
It has been already remarked, that our Lord is to be con-
sidered under three distinct relations, which met and were
blended in his person. He was the Divine Word, the second
person of the Trinity, and as such the Maker and Governor of
the universe. Col. i. 16. He was the Son of Man — the Adam
of the Covenant, or as St. Paul calls him, the second man — the
last Adam. 1 Cor. xv. 45, 47. In this character he was and
is, under God, 1 Cor. xv. 28, the absolute Sovereign and uni-
versal Lord and Governor of the world. As such he is also
the High-priest of the world, and the only Mediator between it
and all its concerns and God. His sovereignty and priesthood
go together, and because he sustains the one, no other being in
the universe is capable of sustaining or performing, officially or
acceptably, the functions of the other. He was also the Mes-
siah of Israel, and as such, the Christ. But his priestly office,
though commensurate with his kingly office as Son of Man, Avas
by God's covenant with David united to or connected with his
Messianic office. Hence it was, that although the purpose of
his first advent was to atone for the sin of the world, 1 John
ii. 2 ; John i. 29, and redeem the world as his inheritance ; his
mission at that time was nevertheless confined to Israel. Matt.
XV. 24 ; X. 5, 6. At his second advent he will come to take
possession of the world as his kingdom, and to rule over it as
the Son of Man. Matt. xvi. 27; xxv. 31, 32; John v. 27;
Heb. ix. 28. See also the notes on Matt. viii. 20, 23—27;
ix. 4; xiii. 37—43.
Bearing these distinctions in mind, we observe that our
blessed Lord, whenever he spoke of his approaching suiferings,
always designated himself as the Son of Man ; as if the body
he bore as Son of Man was the sacrifice appointed for him to
make. Matt. xx. 18, 28; xxvi. 2, 24, 45; xvii. 12; Mark viii.
31; ix. 31 ; x. 33, 45; xiv. 21, 41; Luke ix. 22, 44; xxii. 22.
But his priestly office, to which the act of making sacrifice
belonged, could not, in the nature of things, as we have shown,
be inferior to the order of his manhood, see notes on Matt. xvi.
13, 15; xxi. 28; and the apostle Paul, in Heb. v. 6, 10; vi. 20;
JESUS AS SON OF MAN AND AS CHRIST. 189
vii. 16, 21, expressly teaches us that his priesthood was
according to the order of Melchizedec, the nature of which he
briefly describes. It was higher than the order of Aaron, and
distinguished from it in many important respects. Heb. vi.,
vii., viii. It was perpetual in his hands, verse 24 — it was
according to the power of an endless life, verse 16 — it was
universal in its scope and effect, verse 25. In all these
respects it agrees with the nature, attributes, and office of
Jesus as the Son of Man.
The apostles, on the other hand, in their epistles, never spoke
of his sufferings as those of the Son of Man, but as the suffer-
ings of Christ. Rom. v. 6, 8; viii. 34; 1 Pet. i. 11; v. 1, et
passim. This difference is remarkable, and cannot be accounted
for satisfactorily, except by the distinctions before taken
between the Saviour's relations or offices as Son of Man and
Messiah, and the nature and objects of the present dispensation
of the Gospel, of which the apostles were the first ministers,
and the final dispensation of the restitution of all things. This
will appear by the following considerations.
Israel, according to the flesh, were the chosen or elect people
of God. To them peculiar and very glorious promises were
made, upon the condition of their obedience. Had they fulfilled
this condition, or had that generation of Israel to whom the
Saviour went, received him with true faith, and with the obedi-
ence of the heart, John i. 11 ; Matt, xxiii. 37 ; Ps. Ixxxi. 13 — 16,
then, indeed, they would have been a peculiar treasure unto
God above all people — a kingdom of priests, and eminently
holy above all other nations. Exod. xix. 5, 6. In order to the
fulfilment of these promises, God graciously covenanted with
David that the Son of Man — the Adam of the everlasting cove-
nant, should become incarnate in his race, and the heir of his
throne, by means of which covenant his universal priesthood
was knitted or annexed to his office as Messiah. Such was the
Divine plan; and although Israel fell, and thereby lost these
privileges, that plan was not thereby frustrated. Rom. xi. 11 ;
Matt. xxi. 43. . A new dispensation was opened upon the fall
of Israel, in order to gather out of all nations another elect
people, who should take the place of Israel according to the
flesh ; and by becoming the peculiar people of Messiah, become
also a peculiar treasure unto God and a kingdom of priests.
1 Pet. ii. 9. Now, the ministry committed to the apostles was
appointed to gather this elect people for the Lord Jesus, not as
the Son of Man, (for as such all the nations of the earth are
his) but as the Messiah of Israel or the Church. Hence they
preached him as the Christ, and spoke and wrote only of his
sufferings as Christ, and not as the Son of Man.
190 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
Yet the gathering of this elect people is not the whole of our
Lord's redemptive work. As the Son of Man and the patri-
archal king and priest of the whole world — the true Melchi-
zedec and king of peace,* he redeemed, by the offering of his
* Very various opinions have been entertained concerning the person of
Melchizedec. Some have supposed he was Shem — others that he was a grand-
son of Shem ; others that he was a great-grandson, or other descendant, of
Japhet ; others suppose he was Ham; others, still, that he was a righteous and
peaceful Canaanitish king, cotemporary with Abraham, without pretending to
determine anything more about him. See Stuart on Heb. vii. 3; Excursus
xiii., and Brown's Dictionary. Other writers have maintained that he was the
Holy Ghost. Yet others, that he was the Son of God in his Divine nature;
and still others, that he was Christ himself: which last opinion was rejected by
Professor Stuart, for the reason that it would force us to adopt the interpreta-
tion that "Christ is like unto himself," or that a comparison was formally
instituted by the apostle between Christ and hiinself — "Cujus mentio est refu-
tatio." Upon this question it may be remarked,
(1.) That he was a man, and not God era divine person of the Trinity, fol-
lows from the nature of the office of a priest or mediator for man with
God. Heb. v. 1, 4, 5; Gal. iii. 20; 1 Tim. ii. 5. See Matt. xx. 28; note,
Mark x. 45.
(2.) That he was a greater man than Abraham is expressly asserted by the
apostle. Heb. vii. 7, also 4. He was greater also than the whole Levitical
priesthood put together, for virtually they all paid him tithes in Abraham,
according to the reasoning of the apostle. What Canaanitish king could
answer this description? Abraham had the promises, and was thereby
distinguished above all his cotemporaries. He was called the friend of God.
2 Chron. xx. 7 ; Isa. xli. 1, 8; James ii. 23. He was the greatest mortal maa
of his day.
(3.) That Melchizedec was not a sinful mortal man, who needed to be
redeemed himself by a priest of his own order, is proved by the dignity,
excellency, and enduring nature of his priesthood : for if he were such, it
would follow, that had he been on earth at the time our Lord offered his body
as a sacrifice, though a mortal man, of our fallen race, he would have been
the officiating priest, and performed the act of making the sacrifice, as
Abraham essayed to do when he laid Isaac on the altar. But the whole
course of the reasoning of the apostle, Heb. v., vi., vii., as well as our Lord's
own declaration, John x. 17, 18, renders the things supposed impossible.
(4.) The description which the apostle gives us of Melchizedec, if we may
understand him to mean what he says, proves that he was not a man of
Adam's race He was without father, without mother, without any (human)
genealogy. He had neither beginning of days nor end of life, but was made
like unto (or conformed unto) the Son of God, by reason, or means, as we
suppose, of his union with the second person of the Trinity, and consequently,
eterually a priest without a successor in his office.
(5.) Again, his name, which must be understood in its full and proper
import, is descriptive of his person and office. Thus understood, it can belong
to no being in the universe but the Son of Man— the Ben Adam of the ever-
lasting covenant. For he only can truly be called the King of righteousness
and peace, having universal and everlasting dominion over this world. Isa. ix. 6;
Ps. ii. 6, 12; Dan. vii. 14; comp. also John viii. 58, with Heb. vii. 4. As the
absolute Lord of the world, the Son of Man is the only being capable of the
functions of High Priest of the world, and of Mediator between it and all its
concerns and God. As the world, which was his inheritance, had fallen under
the curse of God, he only could redeem it from apostacy and sin, and restore it
to allegiance and the Divine favour.
(6.) David refers to Melchizedec in a prophecy concerning the exaltation of
Chx'ist as an extraordinary person. Ps. ex. 4: "Jehovah hath sworn, and it
JESUS AS SON OF MAN AND AS MESSIAH. 191
body, the world itself, which was from the beginning his right-
ful possession as the Son of Man. Hence the apostle John,
1 John ii. 2, speaking in the name of the whole body of the
elect, or of the universal Church, says, " Who is the propitia-
tion for our (that is, his elect people's) sins, and not for ours
only, but also for the whole world."* According to the same
distinction, we understand an expression of the apostle Paul,
in 1 Tim. iv. 10, "Who is the Saviour of all men, especially of
those that believe."
The only salvation offered to men during this dispensation is
this great or especial salvation of the elect people, given to
Christ as his peculiar people, Tit. ii. 14, who are to inherit the
privileges first conditionally promised to Israel according to the
flesh, Exod. xix. 5, 6 — called, on account of their subrogation,
"the Israel of God." Gal. vi. 16. Hence the apostles preached
Jesus as the Christ, not as the Son of Man. Their commissions
and all their labours fell within the Messianic ofiice of our
Lord. His kingdom, as Messiah or the Christ, is, during the
whole of this dispensation or order of things, the great and the
only concern. All, to whom the Gospel is preached, are invited
to embrace this great salvation and enter this kingdom. But
when this kingdom shall be consummated by the gathering
to himself of the accomplished aggregate of his elect — that is,
of all who have been given to him in that relation or character,
then will he come in his kingdom as the Son of Man, and
repenteth him not. Thou art a priest for ever, after [according to] the order
[manner] of Melchizedec." It is true he gives no explanation of his person
or character. Yet from the manner in which his name is introduced, he was
of a rank worthy of the Divine persons engaged in the transaction. The oath
of Jehovah cannot be interpreted of an inconsiderable person or thing. Nor
can the Messiah in his exaltation be in any of his relations or offices, of the
rank or order of a mortal man. As observed above, the order of our Lord's
priesthood could not be inferior to the order of his manhood, and he is the one
and only map of his own order. He is the head of the new creation — the
second Adam, and cannot take rank in his person or any of his offices from any
of our mortal race.
These considerations might be enforced by an examination of Heb. v.,
vi., vii., but without more, they justify the conclusion (we submit) that the
Melchizedec who met Abraham and blessed him. Gen. xiv. 18, and brought
forth bread and wine, the elements employed by the Saviour, at the institution
of the Supper, was the Son of Man — the Adam to whom the psalmist, Ps. viii.,
ascribes universal dominion. With this view of the question, let the reader
ponder John viii. 5G — 58: " Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day, and
he saw and was glad." . . . . " Before Abraham was, I am." We add only,
that this interpretation is not open to the objection of Professor Stuart, before
mentioned ; for it amounts to this, that the order of our Lord's priesthood, as
the Christ or Mcasiah of Israel, is according to the order of his nature, offices,
and attributes as the Son of Man. See the notes on Matt. xx. 28.
* The words, the sins of, are a gloss of tlie translators, and should be
omitted. They tend to mislead from the true sense.
192 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
extend his benignant rule over all the nations of the earth,
Matt. XXV. 31, and the blessed effect of his redemptive work
be seen and felt in the restitution of all things.
The sum of what has been advanced on this topic may be
thus stated : Our Lord, in speaking of his sufferings as the Son
of Man, had in view the whole of his redemptive work, not only
as it respected his elect people belonging to him as Messiah,
but the world itself and the nations who are to dwell upon it
during all futurity, which belongs to him as the Son of Man.
Matt. xiii. 41 ; xxv. 31—34, 40.
The apostles, on the other hand, speak only of his sufferings
as Christ, because the ministry which had been committed
to them had respect only to the kingdom w^hich had been
given to our Lord, as the seed of David and the Messiah of
Israel, which must be consummated before his coming into his
kingdom as the Son of Man.
This interpretation suggests that our Lord's kingdom as the
Christ is a kingdom of kings and priests exalted to thrones of
glory in the world of redemption, Rev. iii. 21 ; i. 6 ; v. 10
Matt. xix. 28 ; Luke xxii. 29; Rom. viii. 28—30 ; Phil. iii. 21
1 Thess. iv. 17; 2 Tim. ii. 12; Rom. viii. 17; 1 Pet. iv. 13
Eph. i. 20, 23 ; 1 Cor. iii. 16 ; vi. 19 ; John xvii. 9, 20, 24,
constituting, as it were, a vast temple for the indwelling of the
Holy Spirit. This kingdom is distinct from his kingdom as
the Son of Man, which is a kingdom over this world and the
nations and people that shall dwell upon it. Dan. vii. 14 ; Rev.
xxi. 24; Matt. xxv. 31 — 46. But this also is a glorious and
an everlasting kingdom, which shall not pass away or be
destroyed, Dan. vii. 14 ; ii. 44, out of which he will cast and
destroy all things that offend, and them that do iniquity.
Matt. xiii. 41.
One observation more : The union of the Divine to the human
nature of Jesus as the Son of Man, and the incarnation of both
under the Abrahamic and Davidic covenant, have Exalted his
human nature to the throne of the universe. Rev. iii. 21, and
his elect people to his own throne as Son of Man, Rev. i. 13,
comp. with Rev. ii. 26, 27, iii. 21, and so made them also kings
and priests unto God. Rev. xx. 6 ; v. 10 ; i. 6. Whether,
therefore, the apostles speak of our blessed Lord as the Son of
God, or as the Son of Man, or as the Christ, or simply as
Jesus, they refer to the complexity of his person as God-Man-
Messiah, the Maker and Redeemer of the world — and the Re-
deemer of Israel; and they seldom have occasion, as Paul had
when reasoning about the priesthood of Jesus, to ascribe the
particular parts of his work discriminately to the particular
character, relation or office in which he performed them,
Christ's paying tribute. 193
because their mission and office fell within and were circum-
scribed by his mission and offices as the Christ, and the designed
end and especial purposes of these will be fully attained when
the elect Church, or the Israel of God, shall be completed, and
the Lord shall come to receive it to himself. Matt. xiii. 43, and
see notes on Matt. xii. 8.
Matt. xvii. 24. "And when they were come to Caper-
naum, they that received tribute money came to Peter and said,
Doth not your Master pay tribute?"
The fact that such a question should be addressed to a fol-
lower of the Lord, shows how completely his Divine nature was
concealed under his humanity. The question assumes that he
was a mere man, and a subject of earthly government. It
affords a proof of the meekness and quietness of our Lord's
demeanour. Matt. xii. 19, and of the groundlessness of the
charge made against him before Pilate by the chief priests and
rulers of the Jews. Luke xxiii. 2.
Matt. xvii. 25. " He saith. Yes."
If we reflect what opportunities this apostle had had of
knowing his Master's true nature and character, his answer will
appear more extraordinary than the question. He had wit-
nessed the power of his Avill over the winds and the waves. He
had seen him raise the dead by his voice, feed thousands with a
few loaves, walk on the sea, and but just before, beheld the
transfiguration of his person. He had heard the voice of the
Father acknowledging him as his Son. What impressions
were these things adapted to make on the mind of this apostle?
Yet upon being asked, "Doth not your Master pay tribute?"
"he saith, "Yes." The answer was inconsiderate unless it be
understood as meaning nothing more, than that it was his
Master's habit or practice to pay tribute. But in whatever
sense we are to understand it, our Lord's questioning of him
was designed to awaken reflection and explain the motive of
his OAvn conduct if such had been his custom or practice.
Matt. xvii. 25, 26. " And when he was come into the
house, Jesus prevented [anticipated] him, saying. What thinkest
thou, Simon ? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom
or tribute ? of their own sons or from other persons ? Peter
saith to him. Of other persons. Jesus saith unto him, Then are
the sons free."
It is probable that Peter entered the house to inform the
Saviour of the presence of the tax collectors, and of their
demand. But in this he was anticipated. The case put was
closely analogical. Custom or tribute is both an exaction and
a duty, from which the sons of earthly kings were exempt.
The analogy was too obvious to Peter to require an express
25
194 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
application. He could not have forgotten the voice from the
cloud, "This is my beloved Son." Who could exact tribute
from him or impose on him the duty to pay it ? Has the God
of the whole earth less power than earthly kings ? The miracle
recorded in the next verse, in fact proved his exemption; for
he that could make the fish of the sea his. servants, could have
made all the kings of the earth and their subjects, even the
earth itself, open and proffer to him their treasures at his will.
Matt. xvii. 27. But that we may not "offend them, go
thou to the sea and cast a hook, and take up the fish that first
Cometh up, and when thou hast opened his mouth, thou shalt
find a piece of money ; that take and give unto them, for me
and thee."
The Evangelist does not say that Peter did as he was bid, or
that he actually found the piece of money required. He is
contented with reciting merely the circumstances which led to
this direction, leaving it to the reader to supply the rest. We
have no doubt that the apostle executed his Master's command,
with the success foretold. This miracle had even fewer wit-
nesses than the transfiguration. We are not informed that any
other of the disciples heard the direction, or went with Peter
to the sea, and saw him cast a hook or take a fish with the
money in his mouth. Peter, so far as we know, was the only
witness of the miracle ; but he no doubt spoke of it to his
fellow disciples. It taught them, or should have taught them,
that they could need no other riches than the love and favour of
their Divine Master.
The miracle was an example of our Lord's power, as the Son
of Man, over the fish of the sea, according to Psalm viii. 8,
and this we suppose is the chief point of instruction. Of all
the miracles our Lord performed, this is the most difiicult for
false religionists to explain away. " Peter is sent to the sea,
not with a net, but with a hook ... A net might enclose many
fishes, a hook could take but one .... A fish shall bring
him a stater in her mouth ; and that the fish that bites first.
What an unusual bearer is here ! what an unlikely element to
yield a piece of ready coin!" Bishop Hall. Nothing short of
absolute power over the fish of the sea and knowledge of them,
could have enabled the Saviour to perform this miracle.
This is the only miracle of the kind mentioned by Matthew,
and he selected it, as we suppose, because it was the most
striking illustration of the power -of Jesus as Son of Man. At
the calling of Peter, according to Luke, v. 4 — 10, our
Lord displayed his power over the fish of the sea, and again,
according to John, after his resurrection. .John xxi. 6 — 11.
These last were witnessed only by those who were, or were to
THE APOSTLES ASK WHO SHALL BE GREATEST. 105
be, apostles, and consequently were a part of their private
instruction; and although both of them were perfectly con-
vincing to those who saw them, yet are they more easily evaded
or explained away by rationalistic interpreters, than the one
we are considering. For either the fact itself here recorded
must be denied, or, as Bengel observes, a manifold miracle of
omniscience and omnipotence must be admitted, (1) That some-
thing should be caught— ca^i aliquid ; (2) and that quickly—
et cito; (3) that there should be money in a fish — in pisce fore
pecuniam; (4) and that in the first ^^\\—eamque in pisce jjrimo;
(5) that the sum should be just what was needed— 7iummum
fore tmiti quantum opus esset; (6) that it should be in the fish's
mouth— /ore in piscis ore. Therefore the fish was commanded
(or constrained) to bring a stater or four-drachm coin, that very
moment, from the bottom of the sea.
The miracle illustrates very impressively Psalm viii. 8, before
referred to, and taken in connection with others before remarked
upon, shows that we are to understand the words of David lite-
rally, and in their fullest sense. " Thou madest him to have
dominion (absolute) over the works of thy hands; thou hast put
all things under his feet — all sheep and oxen ; yea, and the
beasts of the field; the fowl of the air, and the fish of the sea;
and whatsoever passeth through the paths of the sea.''
Matt, xviii. 1. "At the same time came the disciples unto
Jesus, saying, Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?"
[of the heavens.]
Mark informs us, ix. 33, of a dispute which had arisen
among them, Avhen they were apart from the Lord; about
which he questioned them, but they were unwilling, for some
cause, to mention the subject of it. Luke, although less par-
ticular in some respects, represents the Saviour as having come
to the knowledge of it through his knowledge of their hearts.
Luke ix. 47. The disciples, it is evident, were confidently
expecting the coming of their Lord's kingdom at that time;
and, as they had been especially chosen to follow him, they
took it for granted that they all would have distinguished
places in it. They expected, also, that there would be dis-
tinctions made between themselves, and the question was, who
of them should be the greatest. Evidently they supposed, that
by privately discussing the matter among themselves, when
Jesus was not immediately present, they could prevent his
knowing anything about their ambitious aspirations, which
shows how imperfectly they understood the character of their
Master. It is important that we should properly appreciate
the character of the disciples, so as not to overestimate either
their piety or knowledge, in order that we may properly under-
196 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
stand our Lord's instructions to them and his method of deal-
ing with them. No fact is clearer than that the apostles,
during our Lord's personal ministry, and until they were
inspired hy the Holy Spirit, entertained very limited and very
erroneous views upon many subjects which, to us, appear too
plain to be misunderstood.
Matt, xviii. 2, 3. "And Jesus called a little child unto
him, and set him in the midst of them" [and having taken him
in his arms, he said unto them, Mark ix. 36,] "Verily, I say
unto you, except ye be converted and become as little children,
ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven."
It is manifest from this verse that the apostles, at that time,
were very far from being fit for the kingdom of heaven, yet
they were, excepting Judas, all elected and chosen of God to
eternal life. Luke x. 20 ; John vi. 70. The mere choice of
them by the Saviour to be his apostles, and the future stew\ards
of the mysteries of the kingdom, included, we may believe,
their election to eternal life. Yet to Peter, to whom the
Father had revealed the mystery of the incarnation, the
Saviour addressed similar words, after foretelling his apostacy :
"When thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren." Luke
xxii. 32. On this occasion our Lord impressively taught them,
that the road to greatness lay in the direction opposite to that
their eyes were turned to. Their views must undergo a change
equal to that of transforming a worldly, ambitious man, doting
on worldly distinctions and glory, into a little child, who cannot
even understand what such glory and distinctions are, and has
no thought or desire to possess them.
What a picture of the kingdom of heaven is here given !
Nothing indeed is said directly of the kingdom itself, but only
of the spirit of its inhabitants. Men must unlearn, as it were,
their whole education, and be brought back to the simplicity of
childhood, to have the first qualification for the kingdom of
God, in which Love is the centralizing or cementing power.
Col. iii. 14, and Rule is service ; and the highest rule the
humblest service. John xiii. 14 — 16; Mark ix. 35; Matt. xx.
26—28.
The word {axpaip-qzi) translated in this place, and also in
Luke xxii. 32, converted^ is not that which is commonly used in
the New Testament to denote a change of heart. Matt. iii. 2 ;
iv. 17 ; xi. 20, 21 ; xii. 41, or of the mind, see Matt. v. 39 ;
vii. 6; xvi. 23; xviii. 3, yet the circumstances of the occasion,
and what our Lord did say to them, imply that they needed it.
And it magnifies the power and goodness of the Saviour that
he not only bore with his disciples, but kept them from falling
away from him, notwithstanding their carnal views and unsauc-
THOSE LIKE LITTLE CHILDREN TO BE THE GREATEST. 197
tlfied affections. He had taken them from the humble walks
of life, and although unlearned, they had derived their notions
of things from the more elevated classes of their countrymen,
and no doubt esteemed those things great and desirable, -which
the great men of the nation so esteemed. He taught them
many things concerning himself which were utterly at variance
with their expectations, and without the illuminating, convert-
ing, and strengthening power of the Holy Spirit, he attached
them to his person — preserved them (the son of perdition only
excepted) amidst all the scandals and temptations to which they
were exposed, to the end of his ministry; and then, as it were,
handed them over to the Holy Spirit to convert, enlighten,
sanctify, and preserve, till they should seal their testimony Avith
their blood. See notes on Acts ii. 1.
Matt, xviii. 4, 5. " Whosoever, therefore, shall humble
himself as this little child" [meaning the child he then held in
his arms, Mark ix. 36, 37,] " the same is greatest in the king-
dom of heaven ; and whosoever shall receive one such little
child in my name, receiveth me." Mark adds: "And who-
soever receiveth me, receiveth not me" [only] "but him" [also]
"that sent me." Mark ix. 37.
The primary object of our Lord, on this occasion, was to cor-
rect the ambitious views of the apostles. He taught them they
must lay them aside, and become like that little child, in order
to obtain even an entrance into the kingdom, the chief places of
which they coveted. But incidentally he taught them also,
that little children were peculiarly dear to him, and not only
that, but that little children, like the one he held in his arms
before them, were, and would be received into the kingdom of
heaven. This is more plainly declared in Matt. xix. 14 ; Mark
X. 14 ; Luke xviii. 16. It would be incongruous to say to the
apostles, that unless they became like little children they should
not enter into the kingdom, unless little children do enter into
that kingdom ; for that would imply that they might enter into
the kingdom by becoming like those who do not enter into it.
How can it be that the receiving of a little child in Jesus' name
is receiving of him unless the child is his ? Can we have a
stronger assurance that all children removed by death, before
the commission of actual sin, are saved ? By nature, indeed,
they are lost ; otherwise they would not need a Saviour. But
because they are the Saviour's, the effect of his work is to
transfer them, at the very beginning almost of their being,
from the stock or parentage of the fallen Adam to his own
stock or parentage as the second Adam ; so that their gene-
alogy from the first shall be reckoned from him. This was a
great object of his incarnation — so great that it seems to be
198 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
represented in the 11th verse as the prominent object of his
coming, which the apostles did not seem to have any conception
of, Matt. xix. 13; Mark x. 13; Luke xviii. 15, even after he
had so explicitly declared it, although they might at least have
conjectured it from their own Scriptures. See Jer. xix. 3, 5;
Joel ii. 16 — 18 ; 2 Chron. xx. 18; Jonah iv. 9, 11; and Numb,
xiv. 23, in the Septuagint, a passage which is not found in the
Hebrew text. According to the Divine plan, this world or this
life, so far as the infant race is concerned, may be compared to
a nursery ground of the kingdom of heaven ; or rather, taking
our similitude from the parable in the 12th, 13th, and 14th
verses — the Father of myriads of worlds is not willing that the
least and most inglorious of them should perish. On the con-
trary, he takes infinite pains to recover it ; and not only that,
but also to recover every individual of the race he planted upon
it. Such was the scope of the mission of the Son of Man, verses
11 — 14. He came to repair the ruin of the fall — to restore the
human family to his kingdom, except so far as personal, actual
sin, persisted in, without repentance and faith, should prevent.
But this exception does not embrace infants removed by death
before actual sin. How extensive, then, and how minute, is the
plan of redemption ! Who can count the number of the infant
dead from the beginning? Yet not one of them is overlooked by
our Father in heaven. He will gather them all into his king-
dom ; but in what orders or ranks, or with what distinctions,
depends wholly on his sovereign pleasure. 1 Cor. xv. 40, 42.*
What our Lord said on this topic amounts to this: None of
the human race, except little children, can enter into the king-
* A strong, if not conclusive argument, in support of this exposition, may
be deriverl from 1 Cor. xv. 22, compared with Rom. v. 12, 14: "For as in
Adam all die, so in Christ shall all be made alive." — " Wherefore, as by one
man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon
all men, for that all have sinned." Death was the penalty of the sin of Adam,
and to die once is the ivhole of that penalty ; so that when death hath passed
once upon an infant, who has committed no actual sin, it has suifered the
whole of that penalty. In other words, the penalty was not to die and then to
be raised from the dead through the work of Christ the Second Adam, and then
to die a second death ; but simply to die once, Heb. ix. 27, on account of the
sin of the first Adam. But the Son of Man came to reverse that penalty, or
rather to bear it for men, and bring them to life again by raising them from
the dead. In this resurrection children, dying in infancy, will have part.
Will their resurrection be a blessing or a benefit to them? Most certainly.
But how will it be a blessing or a benefit, if they are raised from the dead only
to die the second death ? It follows, therefore, from the doctrine of the resur-
rection of the infant portion of our race, -through the work of Christ, that their
condition in the future state cannot be otherwise than happy, because if it
were not so, the work of Christ would be the means of increasing the original
penalty to those who die before they are capable of repentance and faith, and
even of committing actual sin. This argument is developed and enforced in
Russel's Treatise on Infant Salvation,
LITTLE CHILDREN SAVED. 199
dom of heaven; tliat is, none but cliildren, literally such, and
those who become so like them, that they may be called little
children. All the saved, therefore, are little children, either
literally such or made such by Divine grace. It is an inversion
of the Saviour's meaning, to suppose that he primarily intended
humble-minded, child-like disciples or followers. Primarily
he meant babes, little children; and secondarily, his humble-
minded followers, so like them in disposition that they might
be regarded as though they were literally such. This interpre-
tation shows the force of the designation "little children," fre-
quent in John's Epistles, and once used by Paul, and once also
by our Lord. John xiii. 33 ; Gal. iv. 19 ; 1 John ii. 1, 18, 28;
iii. 7 ; iv. 4 ; v. 21.
Matt, xyiii. 6. "But whoso shall offend one of these little
ones, which believe in me, it were better for him that a mill-
stone were hanged about his neck and that he were drowned in
the depth of the sea."
From his care and love for children, and the Divine purposes
in regard to them, the Saviour passes to offences or occasions of
sin given to them by others. As the receiving of them in his
name is receiving him, so offences against them are offences
against him, deserving the severest punishment. A large pro-
portion of our race, some say three-fifths, are removed by death
before they are capable of committing actual sin, and of course
before they are capable of being offended in the sense of the
text. Hence our Lord confines his denunciation to offences
against those little ones who believe in him. For he makes no
distinction between those young persons who have become
accountable for their conduct and others, except that founded
on belief and unbelief — that is, between his Church and the
world. Still, in the case of children who are spared to grow
up to maturity, there is a moment at which each first becomes
capable of committing sin. Until that time, they are the Lord's
in the sense explained. In regard to every one of them there
must be a first sin, and a first occasion of sin, and he who
gives it, falls within this denunciation of the Saviour. The sin
of misleading and corrupting children, or becoming the occasion
of their straying into the way of transgression, we are war-
ranted by this passage in saying, is peculiarly offensive to the
Saviour. How few think that it would be better for them to
die a violent death than to become the occasion of sin to a little
child, or to an humble child-like follower of the Saviour ! How
few consider the fearful responsibilities of their conduct towards
those whom the Saviour claims especially as his own.
Yet such is the condition of the world, and the influences to
which it is subject, that "it must needs be that offences come,"
200 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
verse 7, and sucli is human nature that offences, or occasions of
sin, come even from within ourselves, as well as from the world
without, verses 8, 9. The apostles, and consequently all others,
might become their own tempters, but in such cases the Saviour
required them to proceed to extremities, if necessary. " But if
thy hand or foot offend thee, cut it off," . . . "and if thine eye
offend thee, pluck it out," if there be no other means of resist-
ing the occasion of offence. Recurring, then, to the subject of
children, he repeats, with particular application to the apostles,
a caution already impliedly given : " Take heed that ye despise
not one of these little ones," enforcing it by the dignity and
excellency which the Divine regard and care for them gives
them.
Matt, xviij. 10. " For I say unto you. That thqir angels in
heaven" [literally, in the heavens] "do always behold the face
of my Father which is in heaven."
This expression is to some extent metaphorical ; for God is a
Spirit. See John xiv. 9; i. 18; Heb. i. 3. "No one hath seen
God at any time." Yet we cannot suppose our Lord would
have spoken in this way, if these little ones had no guardian
angels. Paul speaks of angels as ministering spirits, sent forth
to minister to those who shall be heirs of salvation. Heb. i. 14.
What reasonable objection, then, can there be to this belief?
There are angels enough for the service. Paul speaks of them
as myriads. Heb. xii. 22. Even nations have their angels. If
not, how can we explain Dan. x. 20, 21; and xii. 1? The fact
that God uses the ministry of angels in this world, cannot be
denied consistently with the Scriptures. Luke i. 11, 19, 26;
ii. 9, 12; Matt. xxvi. 53; Acts i. 10; xii. 7, 8; xxvii. 23; and
see Deut. xxxii. 8, in the LXX. version; also notes on John xx.
10, 12; and Jacob Ode's Commentarius de Angelis.
Matt, xviii. 11. "For the Son of Man is come to save that
which was lost," [literally the lost ro d.7tol(oXo(;.'\
Besides his mission as Messiah to Israel, our Lord had a
mission as Son of Man. At the imprisonment of John the
Baptist, he entered publicly on his mission to the nation of
Israel as Messiah, John i. 11; at the death of John the Baptist,
he entered on his mission to the people of Israel as the Son of
Man,* and he was now engaged in the execution of that mis-
* This distinction may explain Matt. x. 23, a very difficult passage. At the
death of John the Baptist, we have seen that qui- Lord changed his public
course. Until that event, the nation was on their trial in their public, political,
or associate capacity. The question for them to decide was, whether they
would nationally receive Jesus as their Messiah. By rejecting John and
allowing him to be put to death, they virtually rejected the Messiah also, whom
he foreran. John i. 11. After the death of John, the Lord entered on his
mission to the people as Son of Man ; and the question then was, who among
EXTENT AND MINUTENESS OF THE DIVINE CARE. 201
sion. Hence he said, The Son of Man' is come — is ah-cady
entered upon his work of saving [to d-oXcoXo^) the lost — an
expression comprehensive of all the effects of the apostasy,
both in general and in all, even the minutest particulars. This
is apparent from the illustration the Saviour makes of his
meaning in the next three verses.
Matt, xviii. 12, 13, 14. "How think ye? If a man have
an hundred sheep, and one of them be gone astray, doth he not
leave the ninety and nine and goeth [go] into the mountains
[or leave the ninety and nine upon the mountains and go] and
seeketh [seek] that which is gone astray, [the strayed one] and
if so be that he find it, verily I say unto you, he rejoiceth more
of that [sheep] than of the ninety and nine which went not
astray. Even so, it is not the will of your Father which is in
heaven, that one of these little ones should perish."
The grace and goodness of God, as well as the minuteness of
his care and concern for his creatures, is beautifully illustrated by
this comparison. It extends even to one little child; and would,
even although only one were lost. But there is a magnificent
idea in these verses which we shall fail of, if we do not consider
the extent and diversity of its application. When we consider
the vastness of the creation, and reflect that this world and all
its creatures and concerns, compared with the rest, are but as a
microscopic speck in the ocean; and that the Divine providence
and care are extended as constantly and minutely to the Avhole
of his creation as to this part of it, we are lost in the unsearcha-
ble reach of the Divine attributes and the infinite riches of our
Father's goodness. Some men, of great worldly reputation,
find it impossible to believe that God should care for%o incon-
siderable a thing as this world, and especially that he should
make such provision, as the Scriptures teach us he has made,
for its recovery, even if they could regard it as lost. But they
err through their ignorance of the Divine nature and attributes;
nor do they consider that the goodness of God is concerned to
confine rebellion and sin, if they are to be permitted at all,
within the narrowest limits possible, consistent with his infi-
nitely wise and glorious purposes. The earth, diminutive as it
the people, each for himself, would receive him as the Son of Man and the
Sainour. It was to this change in his relations and ministry, perhaps, our Lord
alluded, when he said to his apostles, "Ye shall not have gone over the cities
of Israel, till the Son of Man be come" — as if he had said — "Ye shall not
have gone over the cities of Israel, before my mission to this nation us their
Messiah, shall be accomplished, and I be ready to enter on my mission as Son
of Man to the people in their individual and personal relations. John i. I'l,
This explanation did not occur to the writer until after the note on Matt.
X. 28, was printed. It appears to be more satisfactory than any suggested
in that note.
26
202 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
may be, is a part of the vast fabric of creation; and man,
humble as he now is when compared with angels, is one of God's
subjects; and the honour of the Divine government is, for aught
we know, as much concerned in his revolt and the curse it
brought on this little world, as it could be in the case of some
greater and more excellent orb, or of some more exalted crea-
ture than man. Add to this, God's attributes of justice and
mercy may be as gloriously displayed in the redemption and
restoration of this little world, as they could have been, had it
been the largest and most glorious of all the worlds he has
made, and for aught we know, even more so. The comparison
in these verses, and the application our Lord makes of it to
the case of one little child, justifies the view we have taken of
this subject ; for, as in the case of a little child, the grace and
goodness of God are not less conspicuously shown, because the
earth is but a little planet and only one out of an infinite num-
ber ; nor because the object of so expensive provision as the
incarnation of the Son of God, is a comparatively little race of
creatures, whose absence would scarcely be missed if blotted
out of existence. Rather let us say, both are magnified and
exhibited more gloriously to all creatures in all worlds.
Matt, xviii. 15. "Moreover if [but should] thy brother
trespass or sin against thee, go and tell him his fault between
thee and him alone ; and if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained
thy brother."
Our Lord had just spoken of ofi'ences coming from the world,
and pronounced a woe upon the world on account of them.
With these he connects another class of offences, namely, those
which s^uld or might arise among his followers who were
brethren. The world could not be dealt with in the way which
was proper to be observed among brethren ; he therefore gives
no directions how to proceed when the offence comes from un-
godly or heathen men. They are to be left to the just judgment
of God. But if the offence comes from a brother, a particular
proceeding is prescribed, which it was the duty of his followers
to observe. So the apostle Paul appears to have interpreted
these directions of the Saviour. 1 Cor. v. 12, 13.*
* The connecting thought appears to be that above suggested, although the
■word {uKiLvSsLKii^a)) translated offend is not sjnonjnious Tvith the word {afA.nj.nxm)
translated trespass. Some critics suppose the expression, "if thy brother
trespass against thee," should be rendered "sin before thee," or "in thy
presence." However this may be, the chief difference between this and the
preceding verses- (7th and 8th), appears to be that, in the former, the Saviour
speaks in general of scandals, offences, or causes or occasions of sin to others,
without discriminating whether in or out of the church ; whereas, in this
verse (15th) he speaks exclusively of sins or trespasses by one brother or
member of his church against another.
OFFENCES BETWEEN BRETHREN. 203
The direction in this and the next two verses, implies that
differences must not be permitted to continue among brethren.
The sin, or the offence, must be removed, or the rehitionship
itself must cease. The overture, or initiatory step, must be
taken by the offended party, and if it is successful, the offended
party is to esteem himself a gainer, by the restoration of fra-
ternal intercourse and relations. We observe, in this direction,
a delicate regard to the infirmities of our nature. Our offences
against our brethren are not to be made public without neces-
sity. A private interview also may be attended with success,
when one not strictly such might fail. It is, therefore, more
hopeful, as well as more brotherly. Hence we might infer that
the next step is directed, in part, at least, with a view to evi-
dence, although not Avithout some hope of reconciliation.
Matt, xviii. 16, 17. ''But if he will not hear thee, then
take Avith thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or
three witnesses every word [the whole thing] may be esta-
blished." [Deut. xix. 15, in LXX.] "And if he shall neglect
to hear them, tell it \i. e., r.av prjua, negotium de quo agitur,
Beza] to the Church ; but if he neglect to hear the Church, let
him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican" [as the
ethnic or the publican is — 6 idurxo^ xac 6 rsAwv-^c-]
The interveners, who are to serve as witnesses, it is to be
presumed, are also to be brethren, although this is not expressly
directed, because they are first to use persuasion, and not until
that fails, are they to appear as witnesses against the offender,
before the whole body of brethren, which our Lord here calls
the Church. He had before spoken once of his Church, but
without any allusion to its condition, either as visible or invis-
ible, or any description of its exterior form or of its attributes.
Matt. xvi. 18. Here he alludes to the Church as a visible
body of brethren — yet imperfect, inasmuch as the precept itself
supposes sins or offences committed by one member against
another.
The learned John Selden supposed the {ecdesia) Church our
Lord meant was the courts of law which then sat in Jerusalem ;
but he mistook the scope of the passage and of its context.
The word occurs in the course of a most important private
instruction, designed for the direction of the apostles in the new
dispensation, upon which they were soon to enter. The idea,
our Lord does not develope. It could not be outwardly realized,
or exhibited to the world, until after his rejection, death, resur-
rection, and ascension, and the sending of the Holy Spirit —
events, as we have frequently remarked, of which the apostles
had no conception. Hence our Lord borrows a word from the
existing institutions, in order to denote a 7ieiv thing in tho
204 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
earth.* Heathenism had no institution analogous to the Church,
■which implies an association for religious purposes in contra-
distinction to secular objects and interests. At Rome the
Emperor was both the religious and political head of the
empire. Cicero regarded the augurship the highest dignity in
the State. The Flamens had the honours of royalty — a seat
and a vote in the Senate by virtue of their oflSce, the curule
chair, and a palace to reside in. The Emperor through his
subordinates took it upon himself to apppoint the high-priest
of the Jews. Religion in the Roman world was wholly a State
affair. Nor had Judaism a Church in the evangelical sense of
the word ; and we may add, it was never meant to have. The
religious and political commonwealth, by Divine constitution,
were identical. That the subjects of either should form a
society in an exclusively religious interest, independent of, or
distinct from, their political relations or duties, was incompatible
with the fundamental idea of theocracy, and would not have
been tolerated in the days of David or Solomon. Judaism
recognized no distinction betAveen the citizen and the wor-
shipper. Every ungodly Israelite was a traitor to his Divine
King ; and every rebel against the State was an apostate from
his religion. See notes on Luke xxiii. 30 ; John xix. 13. Its
express aim was to organize the nation, as such, into a king-
dom of heaven, under the Messiah, and it was the failure of
this aim, through the depravity of nature, so fa*- as that people
were concerned, which gave occasion for the formation of the
Church, out of which, or by means of which, the purposed king-
dom of heaven should ultimately be organized.
The Church of which our Lord spoke then, was to be a new
thing in the earth. Its foundations were to be laid by the
Holy Spirit, and the superstructure to be wholly the product
of Divine power. As in its origin, in the land of Judea, it was
independent of the Jewish State, and, in fact, designed upon
its completion to take its place, and inherit the promises made
* The ■word \KKMvii7rip^o/u.iva>, Mark x. 30; Iv tu
ai'oDvi ip)(^ofAiva>, Luke xviii. 30, ■which are parallel expressions: "in the second
generation, or creation," Triglot, New Test. ; " in the renovation," Dr. Campbell;
"in the new order of things at the end of time, Kenrick, New Test.; "in the
new world," Murdoch; "in sbbcuIo novo," Fabricius, Latin New Test from the
Syriac ; "iterata generatio," A'MmoeZ,- "in renovate, vita," Castalio; "in ilia
restauratione (resurrectione) quando Messias splendidum suum tribunal occu-
paverit," Naebe; "in regeneratione [plena)," Scbast. Schmidt; "bey der Wie-
derherstellung der Dinge," De Welie ; "in jener neuem Verfassung," Sloltz,
Van Ess; " Wiedererzeugung, Wiedergeburt, Wiederaufleben, Erneuerung,"
J. G. Schneider's Lex. Cicero uses the word. Ad Attic, vi. 6, to signify the
recovery of his rank and fortune. Josephus, Antiq. xi. 3, 9, uses it to denote
the recovery of country, after exile. Philo, in Vita Mosis, uses it to signify
the renewal of the earth, after the Deluge. See Rose's Parkhurst Lex., Robin-
son's Lex., Grinjield, New Test , editio Helenistica. The Pythagoreans used it
to signify reditum mentis eic yinTN, cum mens prius defuncti atl vitam in corpus
alterius redibat. Hammond and Le Clerc. See also Adam Clarke.
" H«c vox propria novum seu secundum statum significat to e« Swripou
y&ndwM ««/ uvoLTrKairbhvAi, denuo generari et formari ut aiunt Grammatici."
Hammond and Clcricus. Ilesychius.
Math. Flacius Illyricus notes: "Regeneratio significat illam gloriosam
vitam ubi erit plena hominis et regni Dei instauratio."
Simon, the Romanist, translated by Webster, says: "By the regeneration,
most of the ancient commentators understood the i-esurrection, believing the
last jurlgiaent to be here spoken of. It may be said, likewise, that Christ
speaks of his own reign. The Jews agree that, at Messiah's coming, all
THE REGENERATION OR PALINGENESIA. 215
Our own conception of tbe {iiahyyzvtaid) regeneration, and
of the l^[io.adeca. zcou ouf/aviov) Kingdom of the Heavens, is ex-
pressed in general terms near the beginning of this note. More
particularly it includes:
(1.) The resurrection, exaltation, and glorification of the
Church of the first born or the elect; their installation as kings
things shall be renewed, and the law shall receive a new perfection." See
also Liijhlfoot on Matt. xxiv. 3.
Beza says: " Regeneratio sumitur pro ilia, die, qud, electi incipient novam
vitam vivere, id est, quiim animo et corpore t'ruentur ilia haereditate ccelesti."
This note is translated in the margin of the Old English Bible, Edit. 151)8.
Pfaffius says: "Ad renovationem seculi, mundumque futuruni hie spectari
tam clarum est, quara quod clarissimum : ita ut miremur esse viros qui existi-
ment de regeneratione spirituali, vel priore Christi adventu hrec explicanda,
quern errorem hie et Lightfoot erravit."
Olearius [Obs. Sac. ad Evang. Matt.) says: "Oninino itaque -verissimara
existimem eorum sententiam, qui ■7rcLKiry^inMTouj!ytx; adiTcu 7rcikiyyiviaia.v ma-juai ainpu^iv ....
K. T. K. iSIoah being found faithlul, Uid, by his ministry, preach regeneration
to the world, &c.
Df.ylingius {Obs. Sac.) says: "Nobis magis probatur sententia eorum qui
TrctKiyyivuricLv banc sensu ampliori exponunt de totius universi in die novissimo
renovatione quando cffilum novum, nova terra, ac omnia, eruntnova, secundum
delineationem Joannis Apocal. xxi. Hffic Tntxiyytno-iu. Christo hie nil aliud est,
quam « toiv Trufrenv u7roKctTcicrTu.!ri; Petro commemorata, Act. iii. 21, cujus inno-
vationis pars est restitutio mortuorum per resurrectionem. Hsec enim initium
erit, et magna pars hujus TraKiyyivKrix^ et ajrotJtTao-Tao-aec Trwmmi, qua facta,
Apostoli in judicio extremo erunt a-wdfcvot, testes et assessores Christi, univer-
sum terrarum orbem, singulatim duodecim tribus Israel judicaturi," &c,
MuNSTER [Crit. Sacri) says: " Usee secuuda generatio est resurrectio mor-
tuorum, (juando Christus gloriosus redibit judicaturus orbem et electi et
regenerati ad gloriam simul cum Christo, capite suo, regnabunt," &c.
Le Clerc and Hammond say: " Apud Scriptores sacros, pariter usurpatur
pro resurrectione, seu qutD fit ultimo die, cum corpus restitutum denuo cum
mente conjungetur."
CoccEirs more briefly thus : " TraxiyyuKrix . . . hoc est quando fiet coelum
novum et terra nova in quibus justitia Labitet." He cites 2 Pet. iii. 13.
Jansenius says: "Per regenerationem intelligenda est resurrectio ex mor-
tuis, qua) velut secunda generatio hominis ei-it secundum corpus, quemadmodura
in baptismo est secunda hominis secundum animum generatio." Harm. Ch.
c. p. 717.
iJioDATi : " In the regeneration, that is to say, in the life to come, when
there shall be a new heavens and a new earth." Annotations.
Lamy's gloss is: " In renovata vita,, in future steculo."
PiscATOR says: "Id est in renovatione mundi vel potius, post renovationem
216 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
and priests of tlie Messiah, into the places of honour prepared
for them by the Father in the Avide domains of his universal
kingdom. Rev. ii. 26; v. 10; xx. 6; Luke xix. 17, 19; Matt.
XX. 23; xix. 28; John xvii. 20, 21, 22—26; Phil. iii. 21; John
V. 2. Some of the authors before quoted seem to consider the
resurrection and glorification of the elect as all that is intended
by this term ; others seem to include also, as we do,
(2.) The renovation of the world, and its restoration to the
perfection and glory of Paradise, which, of course, implies the
expulsion of Satan, of sin, and of all physical and moral evil —
in one word, of the curse, and the full realization of the many
prophecies predictive of every conceivable good, both negative
and positive, of a terrestrial kind. See G-resivell on the Para-
bles, vol. i., Introd. part i., chap. xii. pp. 234 — 252, for a sum-
mary of these prophecies.
(3.) It includes also, as we conceive, the restoration of the
twelve tribes of Israel to the land of the covenant; their con-
version and complete sanctification ; the re-establishment of the
Theocracy over them, and consequently their pre-eminence
among the nations of the earth ; for, from Jerusalem shall then
go forth the law and the word of the Lord to all the earth, with
mundi, in altero sseculo quanquam nomen vcLKiyyin(ricL videtur potissimum intel-
ligendum de restitutione corporum et resurrectione."
Cornelius a Lapide comments thus: "Verum omnes alii" (S. Hilario ex-
cepto) "passim per regenerationem, accipiunt resurrectionem comniunem,
futuram in die judicii: ha3c enim, quia corporis totiusque hominis, seque ac
mundi renovatio, et quasi secunda ad gloriam generatio, hinc recte hie et alibi
regeneratio vocatur. Unde Syrus vertit in saculo novo ; Ai'abicus in genera-
Hone Ventura: tunc enim erit novum caelum et nova terra." Isa. Ixv. 17 ; Apoc.
xxi. 1 ; 2 Pet. iii. 13.
Chemnitz (Harm. chap. 132, vol. 1, p. 1372) says: "Alii vero referunt"
(vocem regeneratio) "ad sequens verbum sedebiiis, ut loquatur de sccundo sue
adventu, ubi in novissimo die, qui k Petro dicitur dies restitutionis omnium, et
mortui resurgent omnes, et superstites in momento immutabuntur. Is dies hie
vocatur t Christo regeneratio, eo quod in resurrectione, regeneratio nostra,
qusB in baptismo inchoata, et ubi anima ab omnibus sordibus peccatorum, ab-
luta est, plene ita ut, etiam corpora nostra, incorruptibilitatem et immortali-
tatem induant atque conformia fiant glorioso corpori Christi." Philip, iii. 21.
But Grotius, Hardoin, Whitby, Lightfoot, Townsend, Bishop Bloom-
field, Goadby's Illustrations, New Testament, and some others, refer the phrase
to the present condition of things. Grotius, for example, says that the word
denotes the kingdom of Messiah, which, as he teaches, commenced with the
resurrection of Christ — in other words, he applies it to the present dispensa-
tion of the Gospel among the Gentiles, which in his view is the TraKiyyaitiT-ia..
Calovius says this is against the common consent of almost all interpreters.
He adds that even the Syrian translator whom Grotius quotes, renders the
word seculum novum, and the Arabic, generationem venturam. See Calovius in
loco.
Scott, Henry, Barnes, Jacobus, and many others among modern commen-
tators, on the other hand, with better reason, agree with the ancient, in refer-
ring it to a future condition of the world and of mankind, though they do not
express any distinct idea as to what that condition will be.
THE REGENERATION OR PALINGENESIA. 217
irresistible energy and power. Isa. ii. Ix. The theocracy from
that time forward will not be limited to a single nation, and
that a sinful and rebellious one, as the Hebrews were during the
Levitical economy ; but it will embrace and sanctify all the
nations of the earth, subordinating them to Israel, Isa. Ix. 11 ;
Mai. i. 11, now made perfectly holy, Isa. Ix. 20; Ixi. 3; Acts
iii. 23, while Israel in the flesh in turn, as well as {za idvr] zwu
acoCofisucov) the nations who shall survive the judgment of that
day, Kev. xxi. 24, will be subordinate to the Israel of God, or
the Church of the first-born, the glorified elect, among whom
the apostles will have a peculiar office, Matt. xix. 28, gathered
by Christ their head [iu ro:^ inoupauco:;;, John iii. 12; 1 Cor.
XV. 40, 48, 49; Eph. i. 3, 20; ii. 6; iii. 10; 2 Tim. iv. 18) to
dwell with him for ever in heavenly places, exalted far above all
angelic natures, and clothed with spiritual, immortal bodies,
like the Saviour's, of surpassing beauty and strength. John
xiv. 2, 3; 1 Thess. iv. 17.
Thus the palingenesia^ a word expressive of the great pur-
pose of redemption, embraces the complete reparation of the
evil done by the prevarication and fall of Adam; the restora-
tion of man, as the inhabitant of the earth, to the dignity and
excellence in which he was created, thereby making him a fit
subject of the kingdom of God, as it was originally established
over Adam, and as it now prevails in all worlds into which sin
has not entered; and besides all this, an accession of accumu-
lated glory in compensation, so to speak, for the immense cost
of the Divine achievement, in the elevation of myriads of our
race immeasurably above the rank originally assigned to man
in the hierarchy of created natures.
4. It is implied also, as we conceive, that this new creation,
being a fruit of the redemptive work of Christ, 1 John ii. 2,
will for ever remain before the Lord, perfect and glorious, and
continue to be for ever the dwelling-place of holy, happy beings,
through an unending series of generations, under the headship
of the Second Adam. But, as remarked by Olshausen, the
"word ['paling enesia) does not distinguish the steps of the pro-
cess through which the final result will be reached. The great
Sabbath of the world, or the millennium, is blended in this
expression, with the glory which (iv rotq alcoac ro:^ eTrep'^ofj.spoc^,
Eph. ii. 7) shall follow it. See notes on Acts iii. 21.
5. Again: as the first creation was wholly God's work. Gen.
i. 1; Job xxxviii. 4; Prov. xxx. 4, so will the new creation be.
This is implied in the term (jsvsai^) palingenesia. Whether we
regard it as the second generation of Man (the microcosm,)
or of the earth and the heavens connected therewith (the
28
218 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
macrocosm,) nothing but the creative power of God can accom-
plish it. Man cannot even commence the work on his own soul,
any more than he can consummate it in the resurrection and
glorification of his body. Both the beginning and the end of
the work are of God. Yet the divine plan required that the
offer of the kingdom and its blessings should ever be made under
specific conditions, the rejection or violation of which only
would or could prevent its immediate outward manifestation and
realization. In this manner the kingdom was promised to
Israel at the foot of Sinai, Exod. xix. 5, 6, offered to them
when they were introduced into Canaan, and again in the full-
ness of time by John the Baptist and our Lord, but in every
instance with the same result. In this way God has shown to
the universe the impotency of corrupted nature to recover
itself; the utter insufficiency of a dispensation of law to save
man, and restore the world he made for him, Ps. cxv. 16, to
its lost place in his kingdom. This view of the subject shows
the ground and the reasonableness of such passages as Rom.
ix. 20, 21; Eph. ii. 8, 10; Isa. xlv. 9; Ixiv. 8; xxix. 16; Jer.
xviii. 6; Prov. xvi. 4; Job xxxviii. 5; (Wisd. xv. 7; Sir.
xxxiii. 13;) Prov. xvi. 4; Job xxxiii. 13.
6. Finally, many persons stumble at the idea of the personal
reign of Christ, as the Son of Man or Second Adam, simply
because they conceive of it erroneously. The proper idea of it
may be gathered from the preceding observations. No believer
doubts that our blessed Lord, in his Divine nature, now exer-
cises personal and direct dominion over all unfallen creatures
in all worlds. That he does so, is most clearly and unequivo-
cally taught in the Scriptures. Col. i. 15 — 19; Phil. ii. 9 — 11;
1 Cor. viii. 6 ; John i. 3 ; Rom. xi. 36 ; Rev. i. 5, 6. But
when all things on earth shall be restored. Acts iii. 21, and
this world shall resume its original place in the kingdom of the
heavens, why should not our Lord, as God-Man, also exercise
personal and direct dominion in this ? The personal reign of an
earthly monarch does not imply his constant, visible, personal
presence, at all times, in every part of his dominions. No
more does the personal coming and appearance of Christ
involve his personal continuance on earth in his human nature,
at all times, and his personal absence from all other parts of
creation. Nor does the proper idea of his personal reign
exclude the ministry of creatures, whether angels or glorified
men. But it does imply the .acknowledged supremacy of
Christ as king by all, Eph. i. 10; Dan. vii. 27; John xviii.
36, 37; 1 Cor. xv. 23—25; Coh ii. 10; Phil. ii. 10, the ad-
ministration of his laws as the only authoritative rule of con-
THE REGENERATION OR PALINGENESIA. 219
duct, and such abiding tokens of his presence as will render
his power manifest and his government exceedingly glorious.
See Isa. iv. 5; Besehamp's translation; Medes Works^ folio,
603, 4; Jerusalem's Gilory, by Jeremiah Burroughs, p. 65.
The word {TcaXtyytveaca) regeneration does not occur in the
LXX. version,* and only in one other place in the New Testa-
ment. Yet, the meaning of it is plain. It signifies the new
creation. The verse we regard as parallel in doctrine to Acts
iii. 21; 2 Peter iii. 13: Heb. ii. 5; Rev. xxi. 5; Isa. Ixv. 17;
Ixvi. 22 ; xliii. 19 ; Rom. viii. 18 — 23, with this difference, that
the Saviour here assumes what in most of these passages is
directly taught. If the doctrine of the physical new creation
or regeneration of the earth were not elsewhere taught ; on the
contrary, if it were clear, by the Scriptures, that it is the pur-
pose of God to let the earth droop and wither under the
blighting influence of the curse, until he shall have completed
the number of his elect, and thereupon to annihilate it ; then,
indeed, we could not ascribe to this word any such meaning.
On the other hand, if the Scriptures assure us that it is the
Divine purpose to remove the curse and restore the earth to its
original beauty and glory, it is much worse than useless to pare
down the natural and proper meaning of the word, or wrest it
from its proper meaning, in order to show that the Saviour did
not employ it in its full and proper sense in the promise we are
considering. Let us pause, then, to consider briefly some of
the passages in which the physical regenera-tion of the earth is
taught.
In Acts iii. 21, the apostle Peter speaks of the restitution of
all things implicitly as the effect or result of the {nahyxeveaca)
regeneration or second creation of all things, because such a
work includes, as a necessary effect, the removal of the curse
and the rectification of all physical and moral natures. The
fundamental idea the apostle expresses in his second epistle.
2 Peter iii. 13. In both these passages he had a reference, no
doubt, to Isa. Ixv. 17, and Ixvi. 22, to which we will now turn.
In these prophecies we find that the prophet plainly describes
* In the Septuagint version we find the words hfi&i^n ^'i^ ^y Job xiv. 14,
translated sac liv jraAjy yumiJ.a.i (donee veniat immutatio mea, Lat. Vulg.) Elias
Hutter, in translating this 27th verse of Matt. xix. into Hebrew, adopts the
word nQ-i^ci from Job. In Bagster's edition of the Hebrew New Testament the
word is changed to n'JjnH'"' nH'^'^133 which conforms more closely to the Greek.
Job referred, undoubtedly, to the resurrection of his body ; and those who
understand this word as signifying merely the resurrection of the body,
would probably prefer Hutter's version. Understood of man, Iluttcr suf-
ficiently expresses the sense ; but, as applied to world, the version published
by Bagster is to be preferred.
220 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
a state of things on the earth ; for he refers to a city on earth,
to people on earth, to employments on earth. He speaks of the
building of houses, the planting of vineyards, the propagation
of inhabitants, different stages of human life, infancy and old
age. He speaks of a change of condition in words which imply
identity of place. "The voice of weeping shall be no more
heard in her," implies that, in former times, the voice of
weeping had been heard in her. He speaks, also, under the
same conditions, of the perpetuity of the people. The seed and
the name of Israel, he assures us, shall for ever afterwards
endure, and be as permanent as the new heavens and the new
earth. See Jer. xxxi. 35, 37; xxxiii. 25, 26. These new
heavens and new earth are, we doubt not, the regeneration to
which our Lord refers; and the thrones of judgment he
promised his apostles over the twelve tribes of Israel are to be
enjoyed in this new and blessed condition of all things.*
The apostle Paul, Rom. viii. 18 — 23, evidently refers to the
same era. He describes the earth as travailing and groaning
now; but waiting, nevertheless, with intense expectation for a
glorious change. For the creature, that is, the physical
creation itself, he says, shall be delivered from its present
bondage of corruption, and made to share in the glorious liberty
of the children of God. This deliverance, we conceive, will be
accomplished by the regeneration of which our Lord spoke.
We understand Isaiah vi. 3; xi. 9; xl. 5, as referring to the
same era and condition of the earth. Rev. xxi. 5, seems to be
a repetition of the prophecy of Isaiah ; at least the language
is so similar, that the writer must have had the words of the
prophet in his mind.
Those who restrict the word to the resurrection of the bodies
of the saints, curtail its meaning. It includes physical nature,
as the passages cited prove; to which we may add, Isaiah
xxxii. 14, 15; xli. 18, 19; xliii. 19, 20; li. 3; Iv. 13; xi. 6, 8;
XXXV. 9; Ixv. 25; Hosea ii. 18. Even the lower orders of
animal nature will share in it (Isa. xi.; Ixv. 25; Ezek. xxxiv.
25; Rom viii. 19 — 22) as well as man, and the whole body of
the elect church. Matt. xxv. 31 — 40; 1 Cor. xv. 43—52;
Philip, iii. 20, 21.t
* Many learned men, however, take very difFerent views of Isa. Ixv. 17, and
its context. They all depart very widely from the literal sense, but in different
directions. We must reject all of them, or regard this prophecy as one which
Elias only can rightly interpret. The real difficulty of these learned writers
is to understand" the words of the prophet otherwise than literally as their dis-
cordance proves.
f The word in Titus iii. 5, if rightly interpreted, has the same enlarged sense.
The apostle does not certainly mean that regeneration, or the regeneration,
is, or consists in a washing or baptism, although he alludes, no doubt, especially
THE APOSTLES TO SIT ON THRONES. 221
"When the Son of Man shall sit on the throne of his
glory."
In this expression we have a note of the time appointed for
the fulfilment of the promise. The Saviour promised his
apostles that they should sit upon thrones in the regeneration,
at the time when he should sit upon the throne which belongs
to him as the Son of Man. The regeneration or palinf/enesia
he spoke of, is therefore still future. The precise epoch of its
commencement, as we learn from Matt. xxv. 31, will be reached
"When the Son of man shall come in his glory and all the holy
angels with him ;" for then will he sit upon the throne of his
glory. This is a promise, therefore, for which the apostles still
wait, depending on the faithfulness and the power of their Lord
and Master. Nor are the twelve tribes of Israel yet gathered.
This is another note of time, which serves to establish the
futurity of the regeneration. But many interpreters deny that
the twelve tribes of Israel ever will be restored, see notes on
Matt. ii. 18; and although the Saviour does not here expressly
declare that they shall be, yet he assumes it as a purposed
event. His words are:
"Ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve
tribes of Israel."
All the terms in which this promise is expressed are very
striking and significant; thrones — sitting on thrones— judging,
or ruling over, the twelve tribes of Israel — in the jmlmgenesia,
(the regeneration) when the Son of Man shall sit on the throne
of his glory. The promise hinges on greater events than the
to the renewed state of man, while the Saviour had respect fjeneralhi to the
renewed state of all things. The washing of which the apostle speaks is em-
blematical of tlie renewed state of man in body, soul, and spirit, the consumma-
tion of which will be brought about by his resurrection ; or the reproduction
of his body in a new and glorified form at the coming of Christ, which will
mark also the epoch of the restitution of all things. Acts iii. 21. Hence the
connection between the word as Paul uses it, and the full and proper sense
of it, as our Lord uses it. Paul's subject led him to speak of the palingenesia
only as it respects man ; but the nature or matter of the promise our Lord made
to the apostles, involved the full sense of the term: for the promise respected
the universal state of things which shall 6e, when the Son of Man shall sit on
the throne of his glory ; when, and not before, the apostles shall be rewarded
with thrones and dominion. To the same period the Lord referred in Luke
xxii. 28, 30, and Paul also in 1 Cor. vi. 2 ; — for in that place the scope of his
subject required it, though he did not there use the word TrtiKiyy^vi^tn. as he did
in Titus iii. 5; but his meaning is the same as if he had said {Oux. o(V*t« In
[sv Tx 7r*Kryyivi ho; i^
ctuTctv. See Dr. Owen Boivycr's Crit. Conj. This explanation does not fully
meet the difficulty. It is plain from Matthew, that two animals, the ass and
her colt, were brought by the disciples, and it is plain from the other Evange-
lists, that the Lord entered the city riding on the colt. Bengel says, "our
Lord rode on the foal, but employed also the mother as a companion to the foal,"
but why, he does not explain. We suggest that it was for the more punctual
fulfilment of the prophecy. The word tri^tlS (athnoth) is rendered in the
LXX. by the word C-ro^uym, which word Matthew adopts. It signifies a
draught animal, a beast of burden. Accordingly, it is rendered in the Geneva,
Cranmer's, AVicklifiFe's, and the Bishops' translations of the Bible, the foal of
an ass used to the yoke. Assuming the sense of the Septuagint, as conveying
the proper meaning of the prophet, the Evangelist Matthew differs from the
others, chiefly in being more particular ;. for the purpose, it may be presumed,
of showing hoW minutely our Lord's conduct, on this occasion, corresponded
with the words of the prophecy. He took care that nothing should be want-
ing to the sign or proof which he was now about to exhibit to the nation,
that he was the king in whom the prophet bade them to rejoice greatly.
Zech. ix. 9.
Christ's entry into Jerusalem. 239
circumstance of the Saviour sending two disciples to tlic village,
and the directions he gave them. He says, however, that none
of them understood at that time the meaning of the transaction ;
but after "Jesus was glorified, then remembered they that these
things were written of him, and that they had done these things
unto him." Yet the prophecy is unambiguous, and by thus
fulfilling it the Lord virtually assumed the character of Zion's
King. It was an overt act or claim of sovereignty much more
significant than any which the chief priests alleged against him
before Pilate. Luke xxiii. 2. It was an answer also to the
demand of his authority which the priests and elders made on
the day following in the temple, verse 23, which they might
have perceived, had they remembered the prophecy and under-
stood it.
Matt. xxi. 8. "And a very great multitude spread their
garments in the way, and others cut down branches from the
trees and strewed them in the way."
It appears by John xii. 12, 13, that the multitudes which
attended him on this occasion, in part at least, came out from
Jerusalem to meet him, for the news of his coming had reached
the city. These joined the multitudes which had followed from
Jericho. Matt. xx. 31. It was a vast concourse, which agi-
tated [kaecad-f], verse 10) and aroused the whole city. The
universal inquiry was. Who is this?
The spreading of their garments and the strewing of branches
in the way, were tokens of submission to him, as their lawful
King. 2 Kings ix. 13. It was done {xar ocxouo/jiiau) as a part
of the customary ceremonial of a new accession to the throne.
Matt. xxi. 9. f'And the multitudes that went before and
that followed, cried, saying, Hosanna to the Son of David;
Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord: Hosanna
in the highest."
By this acclamation they indicated that a king of David's
race had commenced his reign; an event which was looked for
by all, and was most grateful to their desires. The word
hosanna was an invocation of his royal aid and clemency,
2 Sam. xiv. 4; I'coaou, 6 ^aadeoc;, awaop, LXX; Serva me, Ilex,
Vulg. ; nrr'in, Heb. ; see also Ps. cxviii. 25, from which this
acclamation appears to have been adopted, as if they had said:
"Hosanna to thee, 0 Son of David; Hosanna to Him who is
in the highest heavens, (I^aavi^a, oo^a no iu uipcazoic: 6£(o.")
We learn from Luke xix. 37, that the acclamation com-
menced at the descent of the Mount of Olives, and from
Matthew xxi. 15, that it was continued until after he had
entered the temple. The Pharisees, who were displeased, Luke
xix. 39, regarded this demonstration of the popular favour as a
240 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
sure indication of his success, John xii. 19; from which we
may infer the impressiveness of the scene. Matt. xxi. 10. Bat
to us it suggests other reflections.
The time had now come when our Lord, in fulfihnent of the
prophecy, must enter his own city as her king. Matt. v. 35;
Ps. xlviii. 2 ; Ixxxvii. 3. His entrance, and the manner of it,
was his own voluntary act; and to give it the force of a true
sign and proof of his character, it must be attended with cir-
cumstances which demonstrated the presence of Divine power,
and with tokens which no deceiver could fabricate. Some of
these have already been alluded to. See notes on verse 3. The
same power which he exerted over the untrained animal, and
over the will of its owners, he exerted over the minds of the
multitude. Their hosannas, though voluntary, could not have
been withheld, or had that been possible, even inanimate nature
would have been subservient to his will. Luke xix. 40.* The
whole transaction, not excepting its minutest circumstances,
was arranged and carried on by the power of his will; as the
homage due to the royal office he had temporarily assumed, in
order to fulfil the Scriptures. Had their hosannas been uni-
versal and sincere, the overflowings of holy hearts, he would at
that time have established his kingdom over them. Luke xix.
41 — 44; Matt, xxiii. 37. But they were not such; rather
were they the homage of depraved natures — a homage, never-
theless, which must needs be rendered, that the prediction of
the prophet might be fulfilled, verse 4.
To this occasion, and the events which soon followed, the
second Psalm undoubtedly refers. Acts iv. 24 — 28; xiii. 33.
The 6th verse refers especially to this occasion, yet only pro-
visionally or conditionally: "Yet have I set my king upon my
holy hill of Zion," [or more literally, "And I have anointed
my King over Zion, the mountain of my holiness."]
Jesus, the Son of Man, Jehovah's King over the whole earth,
was advancing to Mount Zion to take possession of the throne
of David, and to confirm, at that time, the promises unto the
fathers, Rom. xv. 8, if their children would receive him with a
loving and obedient spirit.
Luke xix. 41 — 44. "And when he was come near, he looked'
on the city and wept over it."
The word [ixXaooe) translated wept, implies, says Dr. Robin-
son, "not only the shedding of tears, but every external expres-
sion of grief." It is a more intensive word than {idaxpuas) that
translated tvept, in John xi. 35. The passage proves, that as
* Luke's word >itx,f*^ovTcu is very expressive. It is the only example of the
paulo-post-future teuse iu the New Testameut.
Christ's lamentation over Jerusalem. 241
a man, our Lord felt more deeply for the doomed city and its
inhabitants than any other man could feel ; for no other man
could have so vivid an apprehension of the awful judgments
which their foreseen and guilty rejection of him would bring
upon them. See Luke xxiii. 27 — 31, and notes on those verses.
But notice also the contrasts : He was entering the city with
triumphal displays, amidst the shoutings and rejoicings of
myriads, in the manner foretold by the prophet, yet lamenting
aloud — a circumstance not plainly expressed by the prophet,
yet implied perhaps in the word "'iS', ani. See Deut. xvi. 3;
Prov. xxxi. 5; Gen. xvi. 11; xli. 52, which the LXX. in this
place render npaiJQ — a rendering which the Evangelist adopts.
We do not suppose the word necessarily implies the shedding of
tears, because the Evangelist adds, by way of explanation:
Luke xix. 42. "Saying, If thou hadst known, even thou,
at least in this thy day, the things which belong to thy peace !
But now they are hidden from thine eyes."
This verse may be rendered : " Oh ! that thou hadst known,
even thou also" — alluding, perhaps, to his disciples, who ac-
knowledged him wnth hearty good will — "the things that make
for thy peace, in this thy day!" — meaning, perhaps, that very
day of his entry into Jerusalem, as her rightful King, which was
a day altogether extraordinary. Ps. cxviii. 24. But noAv they
are hidden from thine eyes." See BengeVs Gnomon.
By the rejection of John the Baptist, the nation virtually
rejected the Lord Jesus, and the kingdom he offered them. See
notes on Matt. xiv. 10. By the just judgment of God, there-
fore, the condition of the nation, as such, was changed. Judi-
cial blindness had come over the people nationally. The min-
istry of the Lord, as has been remarked, had also been from
that time changed, and his labours directed to other ends, viz.
to the saving of those who would receive him with the obedience
of faith. John i. 11, 12. Yet no one who considers this verse
with intelligence and candour, can doubt the willingness (rather
say the earnest desire) of the Lord Jesus to save the whole
nation, and to establish his kingdom in outward glory over it,
even at that time. That he did not do so, was owing wholly to
their voluntary rejection of him as their King. Matt. xxi. 42;
Ps. cxviii. 22. Had the nation received him, there would have
been no occasion for a dispensation like the present, the object
of which is to gather another- elect people to take the place of
Israel, according to the flesh. Matt. xxi. 42. Yet, had Israel
nationally received him, a new dispensation, or order of things,
would, no doubt, have been established, in the blessings of which
all the nations of the earth would have shared. But by what
means, or in what manner, the Divine wisdom would have intro-
31
242 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
duced it, "we presume not to speculate or inquire. The Scrip-
tures are silent upon the question, as they have been given to
us, according to the foreknown issues of the Levitical economy.
Acts. XV. 13 — 18. Yet we have no reason to believe, that the
recovery of the world from the fall, and the removal of the
curse, could have been wrought by any other means than the
death of the Son of Man, its King and Lord. But who would
have put him to death, if his people had received him? In the
providence of God, the chosen people had become subject to
Gentile power; and Ps. ii. 1, 2; Acts iv. 25 — 27, may cast
some light upon this subject. Still the question is speculative,
and ought not to be pressed. Of one thing, however, we are
sure, that the Divine power and wisdom can never want expe-
dients to accomplish all the Divine purposes, under all sup-
posable or possible contingencies and emergencies.
We are justified, therefore, in considering the scheme of the
Divine procedure towards Israel, the elect nation, and the world
at large, as framed with a double aspect; that is, as having
respect to what God would do, whether Israel would keep or
break the terms of the covenant. If Israel would obey and
keep the covenant, then they should be a peculiar people, a
kingdom of priests. This is expressly declared, Exod. xix. 5, 6.
They should be exalted to thrones of celestial glory, and be
for ever with the Lord, and not only behold the glory of their
King, but be sharers in it and his throne. The nations of the
earth, from that time forth, would have been subject to their
rule. But if, on the other hand, they should disobey and break
the covenant, as it was foreseen they would, then the promised
kingdom should be taken from them, and given to another
people, to be chosen of God, and called and collected in such
manner and at such times as he should see fit. Matt. xxi. 43;
xxii. 8, 9, 11 — 13; Luke xiv. 24; 1 Pet. ii. 9; and see notes
on Matt. xvii. 22, 28.
Luke xix. 48, 44. "For the days will come upon thee, that
thine enemies shall cast a trench about thee, and compass thee
round, and keep thee in on every side, and shall lay thee even
with the ground, and thy children within thee, and they shall
not leave in thee one stone upon another, because thou knewest
not the time of thy visitation."
This prophecy was pronounced as the Lord Jesus was about
to enter the city as its King. It was repeated more in detail
to four of the disciples upon the inount, from which he was then
descending, two days afterwards, Luke xxi. ; Matt. xxiv. ;
Mark xiii. ; and the same calamities he alluded to again, when
bearing his cross to Calvary. Luke xxiii. 29. The true cause
of them is assigned in the last clause of these verses. The
EXPULSION OF THE MONEY-CHANGERS. 243
nation "knew not the time of its visitation," words which
correspond to the 42d verse. The time had come when the
peace of the nation must be established under his rule, or the
nation itself must be given over to the power of its enemies.
He would have gathered and protected them with the most
affectionate care, Matt, xxiii. 37 ; Ps. Ixxxi. 13 — 16, but they
would not be gathered. The fault was theirs. The Saviour
had exhibited to them all the appointed proofs of his Messiah-
ship. The manner of his entry into the city at that time was
a prophetical sign of his royal character, and claim to their
allegiance. Had it been possible for them to receive him with
the obedience of faith, and had they done so, "he would have
soon subdued their enemies, and turned his hand against their
adversaries. The haters of the Lord should have submitted
themselves to him, but their time should have endured for
ever." Ps. Ixxxi. 14, 15.
Matt. xxi. 10, 11. "And when he was come into Jerusalem
all the city [the whole city] was moved [agitated, put in com-
motion,] saying, Who is this? And the multitude said, This is
Jesus, the prophet of Nazareth of Galilee."
Matthew alone notices the irapressiveness of the popular
demonstration and display upon the masses of the city, thronged
as it was at that time. Probably this minuteness was suggested
by the fact that it was the fulfilment of the important prophecy
he had quoted. Never before had our Lord entered the city
in that manner, and never did he so enter it again. Yet it is
noticeable, that the multitudes who thus honoured him, ascribed
to him no higher character than that of a prophet from a
despised city. Unwittingly, therefore, they fulfilled the pro-
phecy, John xii. 16, not even understanding the hosannas
they offered to him as the Son of David; thus ignorantly
acknowledging him as their King, whom their rulers, five days
afterwards, ignorantly but wickedly rejected and slew. Acts
ii. 23; iii. 17.
Matt. xxi. 12, 13. "And Jesus went into the temple of God
and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and
overthrew the tables of the money-changers, and the seats of
them that sold doves ; and he said to them. It is written, My
house shall be called the house of prayer, but ye have made it
a den of thieves."
Some harmonists refer this transaction to the next day,
(Monday, according to our reckoning,) in order to reconcile
Matthew with Mark. Others suppose, that it was repeated on
the next day, as Mark relates, with this additional restraint,
that he would not suffer any one to carry a vessel through the
temple. Mark xi. 16. According to this hypothesis, the Lord
244 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
drove out of the temple the money-changers thrice, viz. once
before he entered upon his public ministry, while John was
still baptizing, John ii. 13 — 17, and twice just before the close
of it.
Without entering into a formal discussion of the question,
the Avriter adopts this view of the matter, as it appears to be
both reasonable and natural. Another question has been made,
whether the action was miraculous or simply natural. Upon
this, we remark, that the transaction was in harmony with the
other acts of our Lord on that occasion. He had, in the ful-
filment of prophecy, Zech. ix. 9, temporarily assumed his
character of King of Zion. Entering the city as her King, in
the manner foretold, he proceeded to the temple and entered it
also in that character. This is evident from the hosannas
which he there received in despite of the remonstrances of the
priests and scribes, verse 15. All felt his presence and the
mysterious power of his will. His works in the temple on that
occasion, were {Qa\jp.dai(i) wonderful — wonderful, as we suppose,
in comparison with any he had exhibited on other occasions,
verse 15. For a little space, he acted as King, though {jtpaxxi)
meekly or mildly, in comparison with the powers he will exert
when he shall sit on the throne of his glory. Matt. xxv. 31, 82.
It was in keeping with the occasion, and indeed it was required
by the prophecy he was fulfilling, that he should do so. This
view is confirmed by the next verse.
Matt. xxi. 13. "And he said to them. It is written, My
house shall be called the house of prayer, but ye have made it
a den of thieves." Mark xi. 17; Luke xix. 46.
He claims the temple as his own — his house: his, by Divine
right, as King of Zion. See Matt. xii. 6. In that character
and by that right, he expelled, not by a scourge of cords, John
ii. 15, but by force of his will, those who polluted it. These
words must have been understood by those who heard them as
an assumption of personal authority over the temple, and of
the right to overrule the authority of the priests. Therefore
it was, that on the next day the priests and the elders made a
formal demand of his authority, and whence he derived it,
verse 23, seeing the guardianship and the use of the temple
was by the law and the constitution of their commonwealth
especially committed to them. It is natural to suppose that
this demand was made officially, and after a fonual consulta-
tion; which the exciting events -of the preceding day did not
allow them to hold. The reader will observe also, that their
demand did not turn upon his miracles of healing, verse 14, or
upon his teaching, see Matt. xxii. 16, for these they did not
THE HOMAGE OF THE CHILDREN. 245
regard as an invasion of their authority, but upon his other
acts on that occasion.
Matt. xxr. 15, 1(3. "And when the chief priests and the
scribes saw the wonderful things [daoiJ.aaca, the wonders] he
did, and the chikh-en crying in the temple, and saying, Hosauna
to the Son of David, they were sore displeased [indignant,]
and said to him, Hearest thou what these say?"
This question of the priests and scribes shows the chief cause
of their indignation. They understood the import of the accla-
mation, see notes on verse 9, and regarded his acquiescence, as
an assumption of the character the children ascribed to him.
They were justified in doing so, by the acts of authority he had
previously performed. We have no reason to suppose that the
healing of the lame and the blind especially moved them, as the
day was not the Sabbath. Luke xiii. 14.
Matt. xxi. 16. "And Jesus said to them. Yea," [[ hear
them; and] "have ye never read. Out of the mouth of babes
and sucklings, thou hast perfected praise?"
By this quotation, Ps. viii. 2, our Lord tacitly alludes to his
own majesty as Son of Man: for the words of David were
addressed to himself as Jehovah Lord. " 0 Jehovah, our
(Aden) Lord, out of [or from] the mouth of babes thou hast
perfected praise." Well, therefore, might he approve and.
appropriate to himself as Son of David the hosannas so offensive
to the priests and Scribes ; for to him alone were they due.
See notes on Matt. ix. 4. It is plain, however, that the Jews
had no conception of the mysterious union of the Divine and
human natures in the person of Messiah, or the Son of Man in
the Son of David ; for on the same day, and perhaps in the
temple on the same occasion, his discourse concerning himself
as the Son of Man, John xii. 23 — 34, prompted the people to
inquire, "Who is this Son of Man?" verse 34. "The Christ,"
said they, "abideth for ever." This we have heard out of the
law: but thou sayest, "The Son of Man must be lifted up."
The seemingly opposite destinies of these two persons, as
declared by the law and by himself, proved to the apprehen-
sion of the people that they could not be the same person.
This inquiry of the people was not made in a sceptical spirit,
for they regarded him as a prophet, and were very attentive to
hear him. Luke xix. 48; Mark xi. 18; Matt. xxi. 46. That
the Son of Man was not an ordinary man was apparent from
the whole tenor of our Lord's discourse ; especially from John
xii. 23, the glory claimed for him, attested as the claim was,
by a miraculous voice, verses 28, 29. This they must have
understood: but who could he be? They had not heard of
him as they had of the Christ, out of the law. It is significant
246 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
that our Lord did not answer the inquiry. It proves that
there was a mystery in the matter, which it did not belong to
his mission to explain. Comp. verses 34 and 35 of John xii.
The view the writer takes of the question will be apparent to
those who have considered the preceding notes. As the Adon
or Lord of the world, he became incarnate in the line of David.
It was this purpose which excited the amazement of David.
See notes on Matt. ix. 4 ; Matt. xvi. 13, 14, 16. As the seed
of David, he was also King of Zion. On the ground of this
distinction, we account for the discriminative words of Ps. ii. 6 :
"Yet have I set my King," that is, my King of the whole
earth, "upon Zion, the mountain of my holiness." He had
now come in fulfilment of prophecy, Zech. ix. 9, meekly, yet
authoritatively, to take possession of his kingdom and of his
temple for a brief space, and then voluntarily to offer up his
body as a ransom for the world, of which, as the Son of Man,
he was the Lord. Considering his foreseen rejection as Mes-
siah, this was the great end of his incarnation and mission;
and that was the mystery which the question of the people
touched upon. Our Lord's answer was in effect: "Use well
the light you have, while you have it, without inquiring into
matters which do not especially concern you at this time."
John xii. 35, 36.
Matt. xxi. 17. "And he left them, and went out of the
city into [to] Bethany, and lodged there."
According to the harmonists, our Lord's triumphal entry
into Jerusalem, and the transactions in the temple which we
have considered, occurred on Sunday, or five days before the
passover. It does not appear that he lodged in the city any
night afterwards. He went either to Bethany, Mark xi. 12, or
to the Mount of Olives, Luke xxi. 37, 38 ; Matt. xxvi. 30 ;
Mark xiv. 26 ; Luke xxii. 39, or to the garden of Gethsemane,
Matt. xxvi. 36, or to some other place out of the city, Mark
xi. 19. Are we to regard this conduct as a precaution, designed
to guard by natural means against his apprehension before the
appointed time, see John x. 39, and notes on Matt. ii. 12, 13,
or a part of the arrangement by Avhich the punctual fulfilment
of the prophecies was to be accomplished, see John xviii. 2;
Acts i. 16, or both? However we may resolve these questions,
it is evident, the rulers thought it a matter of much difficulty to
apprehend him, requiring even subtilty on their part, Matt,
xxvi. 4; Mark xiv. 1; John xi. 57, and so did Judas. Luke
xxii. 6; Matt. xxvi. 15. Hence they eagerly embraced the
offer of the traitor. Luke xxii. 5. It is probable, too, they
thought night the only time when the apprehension of him
could be made without danger of a rescue by the people. See
THE WITHERING OF THE FIG-TREE. 247
Matt, xxi 46 ; Luke xix. 48. But they kneAv neither the mys-
tery of Providence, nor the mystery of his person. No hand
could apprehend him before the appointed hour had come.
John vii. 30 ; viii. 20 ; xiii. 1 ; Luke xxii. 5.3. Then he volun-
tarily surrendered himself. John xviii. 4 — 8. The manner of
his apprehension, therefore, was an unnecessary indignity, and
so the Saviour himself spoke of it, as the Evangelists are care-
ful to notice. Matt. xxvi. 55 ; Mark xiv. 49 ; Luke xxii. 53.
It is sufficient to add, that our Lord's daily departure at
evening from the city, gave occasion to the priests and rulers
to display their character ; and especially to Judas, -vvho
entered into a formal compact with them on the Wednesday
following, to perform his part in the final scene.
Matt. xxi. 18—20; Mark xi. 12—14, 20, 21. The wither-
ing of the barren fig-tree.
The miracle recorded in these verses was witnessed only by
our Lord's disciples. Mark xi. 14. It was wrought apparently
for the purpose of conveying to them the instruction contained
in the next two verses, verses 21, 22. If we regard the tree
as a symbol of the nation, and the malediction as indicative of
the nation's doom, until the end of this dispensation, the time
of the act may be significant. Our Lord had entered Jerusa-
lem, the day before, as her King, but he was not received in
that character, except by the children. The multitudes hailed
him only as the prophet of Nazareth, while the rulers plotted
against his life. John xii. 36. With that day, therefore, the
day of their national visitation ended, and before he entered
the city again, he portrayed in the fig-tree the nation's doom.
The parable of the fig-tree, in Luke xiii. 6 — 10, at least favours
the symbolical interpretation of this miracle, although we can-
not, as before intimated, find ground for such an interpretation
in the context. See Matt. xxi. 42, 43. Nor is it probable
the disciples, at that time, saw more in the miracle than an
exhibition of power which the Saviour taught them they would
be able to exercise through faith in him ; and thus considered,
we understand in the literal sense the following verse:
Matt. xxi. 2L "Verily, I say unto you, If ye have faith,
and doubt not, ye shall not only do this, which is done to the
fig-tree, but also if ye shall say to this mountain. Be thou
removed, and be thou cast into the sea, it shall be done." See
Mark xi. 22, 23.
This is teaching by example; a method .which excludes
hyperbole. Yet, as before intimated, the promise has respect
to the glorified elect in the world to come. See notes on Matt,
xiv. 30, 31; John xiv. 12. If, indeed, we assume that our
Lord, in this promise, had respect to his believing people in
248 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
this world, then it must be confessed it has never been realized,
even in the holiest of men, 1 Cor. xiii. 2, and we feel con-
strained by the fact, to divest it of its proper literal meaning.
What our Lord added to these words, however, may be intended
to describe the power of faith in this life.
Matt. xxi. 28. "And all things whatsoever ye shall ask in
'prayer^ believing, ye shall receive."
Here prayer is added to faith, as a means to the end. On a
former occasion, Matt. xvii. 21, see notes, he prescribed /«s^m^
as well as prayer, but in that case, with reference to their exer-
cise of miraculous powers in this life. But in this verse, the
Saviour seems to speak only of believing prayer; and thus
understood, there is no reason. why we should confine the
promise to the apostles, any more than we should the injunction
to forgive, which Mark adds, xi. 25. The promise of our Lord,
thus interpreted, extends to the Avhole futurity of the believer's
being — to his state of humility and suffering in this life, and to
his state of glory in the ages to come. We may add, the
largeness of our Lord's conceptions, including, as they ever
did, his whole work, favours this interpretation. All his pro-
mises to his elect took hold of unfathomable mysteries.
Matt. xxi. 23 — xxv. 46.
The matters recorded by this Evangelist, beginning at this
place, and ending with chapter xxiii., are commonly supposed
to have occurred on (Tuesday) the third day before the pass-
over. Our Lord's prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem,
delivered privately to four of his disciples, Peter, James, John,
and Andrew, Mark xiii. 3, and the parables he subjoined to it.
Matt. xxiv. and xxv., are assigned to the same day. On this
day, (according to some Harmonists, but according to others on
the day following — Wednesday) the priests. Scribes, and elders
of the people were formally convened at the palace of the
chief -priest. Matt. xxvi. 3, to devise means for the apprehension
of the Lord Jesus, when Judas sought admission to the assem-
bly, and entered into a formal compact with them. Matt. xxvi.
14 — 1(3. On the day preceding, (Monday) the Lord had
expelled the traders and money-changers from the temple, and,
as we may infer, from Mark xi. 18, taught the people, but what
he taught them, does not appear. Mark xi. 15 — 19. The day
before, (Sunday) he had entered the temple amid the shoutings
of the people, and having taken a survey of it, without teach-
ing, or, according to Mark, performing any other act, he retired
to Bethany with the twelve. John, xii. 20 — 36, however,
records an impassioned discourse to the people on that day,
which, if we may consider it in connection with his triumphal
entry, shows how he was affected by the hosannas which had
CHKIST IS QUESTIONED BY THE PRIESTS. 249
been offered him. But not to dwell on these circumstantial
notices, vre remark that the reader will not appreciate the sub-
limity of this portion of the Gospel, without a profound sense
of the majesty of our Lord's person, and the solemnity of the
crisis the nation had reached. It was the last day of our Lord's
public ministry. Several hours before the close of it, and we
doubt not, before the hour of evening prayer, he took his final
leave of the temple, declaring it left desolate. The death of
John the Baptist, we have seen, was an epoch in the n.ation's
history. It marked their near approximation to the verge of
destruction, and their certain downfall. See notes on Matt. xiv.
6 — 9. Now the crisis had come. In an important sense, it
was the nation's day of judgment. For although the Lord did
not enter the temple on that day officially to judge the nation,
yet he entered it to pronounce w^ords of reprobation and pun-
ishment, by commandment of the Father, which, in the course
of Divine Providence, were soon to be put in execution, with
fearful and prolonged effect. Luke xxi. 22. Accordingly, the
language he employed was positive, direct, and judicially
denunciatory.
We must not regard the words he uttered as the languao-e of
strife or mvective, nor his responses to his assailants as an
exhibition of dialectic skill. This would be a low view,
infinitely beneath the dignity and majesty of his character, and
quite at variance with the solemn function he was performing.
He was the Son of Man, and the rightful Lord of the world.
He was the Christ, and in that relation the king of Israel.
He was the Minister of God the Father, performing, by Divine
command, the last public, ofiicial act of his ministry. John
xii. 49, 50. A tone of authority, power, and majesty, pervades
all his sayings on that day, and his words did but convey to
them God's reasons for the fearful calamities he was about to
send upon the nation. Wo return now to the text.
Matt. xxi. 23. " And when he was come into the temple, the
chief priest and the elders of the people came unto him as he
was teaching, and said. By wdiat authority doest thou these
things, and who gave thee this authority?"
Our Lord left Bethany (rrfxaia^) early in the morning, verse
18. The impression his preaching had made on the people was
very deep. Luke xix. 48. In the expressive language of Luke
[i^sxoe/mzo) they hung upon him, and assembled very early
{loodfH^s, Luke xxi. 38,) to hear him. We may rensonably
suppose he had been engaged a considerable time in teaching,
before the dignitaries of the nation appeared at the temple,
with their demand, which seems to have been ofiicially made.
The motive for making it may have been, in part, at least, to
32
250 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
counteract his influence with the people, which they greatly
feared, xxvi. 5 ; John xii. 19 — and if so, they would be likely
to make it with a stately show of their own authority, to impress
the people, and perhaps also with the vain conceit of producing
awe in the mind of Jesus. However this may be, the demand
interrupted his discourse to the people, and drew their attention
to his discourse with the priests and elders which followed.
It was a new step upon the part of the rulers, and calculated
to create the apprehension that it would be followed by violence.
According to Mark's account, which doubtless is accurate, on
this occasion also our Lord drove out of the temple the traders
and money-changers. There is nothing incredible in the sup-
position that the mercenary people he had cast out the day
before, according to Matthew's account, had returned, or that
others had taken their place; and this is the view we take of
the matter. See notes on verse 12. This demand of the
priests, therefore, referred rather to this act of authority, than
to his assumption of the office of a teacher, and thus understood,
it may be paraphrased thus: — "By what authority dost thou
forbid and prevent that which we, the lawful guardians of this
holy place, have seen proper to permit ; and who gave thee
authority to interfere with, and overrule our regulations ?"
The demand for his authority was a demand for eviderice of
his authority. It implied, that the miraculous works which he
had performed before them in the temple, verse 14, and during
the whole of his public ministry, of which it must be supposed
they had personal knowledge, were not sufficient evidence to
satisfy their minds. Therefore, had the Saviour replied to the
demand — "My works show my authority. They testify of me;
who I am, and whence I came. They are such as no man ever
did," — this would have been but repeating what he had often
told them before, and what they had rejected as sufficient proof
of his Divine mission. They regarded them, or aflected to
regard them, in another light. Hence, our Lord replied by
asking them another question.
Matt. xxi. 24. " And Jesus answered and said unto them:
I also will ask you one thing, which if ye will tell me, I in
like wise will tell you by what authority I do these things."
As if he had said: Seeing you judge, that my works, per-
formed in your presence, do not prove my authority to do these
things, nor show whence I derive it, I also will ask you one
thing, your answer to which will prove, whether you can be
convinced of my authority, by any evidence which God has
seen proper to give you upon that question : for other or greater
evidence you cannot have.
Christ's response to the priests. 251
Matt. xxi. 25. "The baptism of Jolin: whence was it?
From heaven or from men?"
The reader must remember that the whole evidence which
God saw proper to give the Jews of the Divine mission of the
Lord Jesus, was comprised in the ministry or baptism of John,
and his own ministry, especially his miraculous works. This
has been sufficiently shown in the foregoing notes. Especially
did our Lord rely upon his works, placing them not only above
the testimony of John, but his own words. John v. 30 — 37 ;
XV. 24. No other signs from heaven of his authority were con-
sistent with the Divine plan. Matt. xvi. 1 — 4, and see notes on
Matt. xii. 48. It is obvious, therefore, that if the questioners
were not convinced by the miracles of the Lord, and their ques-
tion, as we have said, assumes that they were not, the only
remaining source of proof was the ministry or baptism of
John. This, though inferior evidence to miracles, was in its
nature and power a sufficient attestation of the Divine mission
of Jesus. See notes on Matt. iii. 1, 2 ; xi. 3.
Some commentators suppose that the turn which our Lord
gave to the question of the priests and elders was designed to
put them in a strait between their malice and their fears — an
effect which it had. But the motive of the Saviour, as we con-
ceive, lay deeper. His question was pertinent to their ques-
tion— their question being considered with reference to the only
evidence upon which it could possibly be resolved. It was de-
signed to prove out of their own mouth that neither the testi-
mony of John, nor his own wonderful works could convince
them ; and without these, his own verbal declaration of his
authority would be, even in his own view, of no avail. John
V. 31; xiv. 11; xv. 24.
Mati. xxi. 25, 26. " And they reasoned with themselves,
saying, If we shall say. From heaven, he will say. Why did ye
not then believe him ? But if we shall say. From men, we
fear the people; for all hold John as a prophet."
Some, perhaps most, readers take it for granted, the Saviour
would have replied as the priests and elders surmised he would,
if they had answered his question truly. By such a reply they
would no doubt have publicly convicted themselves of enormous
guilt, but it is by no means certain that his answer to them
would have been such as they imagined. Certainly he would
have fulfilled his promise, and shown them his authority, and
perhaps have made it convincing to them by his power over
their hearts. Had they overcome their fears, and answered his
question, as they desired to do, falsely, though they would not
have fulfilled the condition upon which his promise depended,
yet he might have told ihem, in reply, that no further evidence
252 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
could be given them of his authority, but that which was fur-
nished by the baptism and ministry of John and his own works,
both of which they had rejected. See Matt. xvi. 1 — 4, and
notes. That they would have answered the question falsely,
had they not been restrained by their fears, is evident, not only
from their treatment of John, but from the form of our Lord's
reply.
Matt. xxi. 27. " And they answered Jesus and said [oux
ocoafuv,~\ We cannot tell," [rather, "We do not know."]
According to this answer, the baptism of John might have
been of Divine origin, for aught they knew to the contrary.
Their rejection of him, therefore, was not only extremely rash,
considering the effect of his ministry upon the minds of the
people, but guilty, in not giving due heed to the evidence they
had upon a matter of so great moment. If we assume, how-
ever, that their answer was insincere — that they really did
believe that John's baptism was without a heavenly warrant, it
would prove that the evidence of John's authority was inef-
fectual to produce conviction in their minds, as the miracles of
the Lord Jesus were ; and also, that their unbelief and obduracy
were insurmountable by the combined force of all the evidence
God had seen proper to give them.
Matt. xxi. 27. "And he said unto them, Neither tell* I
you by what authority I do these things."
Our Lord kneAv their thoughts and answered them according
to their intent, and not according to their words. He assumed,
however, the Divine authority of John's mission, as well as his
own ; which in eifect he connected together as one in purpose
and intent, so far as they respected the nation, by his question.
The admission or denial of John's authority was in effect the
admission or denial of his own, John v. 33, 36, and a doubt
concerning either, was a doubt which could not be removed by
additional evidence: Hence the appositeness of the reply.
Matt. xxi. 28 — 31. Having thus disposed of the question
proposed to him by the chief-priests and elders, our Lord put
to them an hypothetical case taken from common life, upon
which he framed another question in such terms, that it could
receive only one answer. "But what think ye?" What would
be your opinion in this case? "A man had two sons, and going
to the first, he said, Son, go to work to-day in my vineyard.
He answered and said, I will not ; but afterwards he repented,
and went. Then going to the second, he said [likewise] the
same. And he answered and said, I go, sir, but went not.
Which of the two did the will of the father?"
* An old commentator notes on this verse : ohx, ilmv, ouk oU-x, Lkk', c'u Kiyrn —
will TOU iilK ii^wKn^urt TO dKH^H t'lTTUV,
THE NATION REJECT HIM. 253
This case was put with tacit reference to the Jewish people,
considered under two divisions — the rulers and the ruled — the
priests, Pharisees, lawyers, Luke vii, 29, 30, and the learned
on the one hand, and the common people, including the lowest
and most despised classes of them, on the other. John vii.
45 — 49. The former were, by outward profession, the servants
of God, and the acknowledged ministers of his religion — the
teachers and guides of all classes of the common people. Matt,
xxiii. 2, 3. Upon all questions of religious worship and duty,
their decisions were authoritative and decisive. The appearance
and public ministry of John the Baptist, were extraordinary
and startling events. They were so regarded by all. He
summoned the nation to a new baptism, which was a religious
rite, well known to them. But by what authority ? That was
the great question. The priests, rulers, and teachers of the
people claimed the right to decide it as they did other questions
connected with religion ; and the masses of the people, it is
probable, would have easily acquiesced in their decision, had
not John's authority been authenticated by the most ample and
convincing proofs. See notes on Matt. iii. 1. The rulers did
decide the question, but the people almost universally, Luke
iii. 21; Matt. iii. 5, 6, rejected unhesitatingly and strongly
their decision, and as a proof of their sincerity, sought him and
submitted to his baptism.
But the contrast which our Lord intended to make was not
between the rulers and the masses of the people generally, but
between the rulers and those whom they regarded as the lowest
and vilest of the common people, who led openly irreligious
and immoral lives; thereby showing not only no profession of
service, but that they had no sense of religious obligation.
Accordingly, upon receiving the answer of priests and elders,
he said, verse 31, " I say unto you, the publicans and the har-
lots go into the kingdom of God before you,"
As if he had said, " You priests and elders who profess to be
the servants of God, and the guardians of the temple of God,
promise well indeed, but you perform not, and however highly
you think of yourselves, are farther from the kingdom of God
than the publicans and harlots whom you despise."
Matt. xxi. 32. "For" when "John came unto you in the
way of righteousness," [that is, in the divinely-appointed way
of bringing in everlasting righteousness] "ye believed him
not," [on the contrary, ye rejected all the proofs which God
gave you of his Divine mission, although they convinced every
one but you, for] "even the publicans and harlots believed
him; but ye, when ye had seen," [and had had ample oppor-
tunity to consider those proofs, notwithstanding your large
254 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
professions of obedience,] "repented not, that ye might believe
in him." Therefore, "publicans and harlots go into the king-
dom of God before you."
On this occasion, our Lord referred for the last time, so far
as we know, to the ministry of John the Baptist; and the
reader will observe he does so in connection with his own. As
on a former occasion, see Matt. xi. 10 — 14 and notes, so now,
he bears the strongest testimony to John's authority. Then,
indeed, John, though imprisoned, was in the midst of them. It
was not too late tlien for the nation to receive him. But now he
speaks of John's ministry as a bygone matter, as an opportunity
neglected and gone beyond recall. The rejection of John, we
have seen, was in eflFect the rejection of the Lord himself, see
notes on Matt. xiv. 10, and so he treated it, as appears by the
next parable, verses 33 — 39. All questions, therefore, touch-
ing his authority or the authority of John came too late. No
answer could have served any interest which they had at stake.
By employing the words we are considering, our Lord assumed
that the day of national visitation was over, and the hope of
Israel, as a nation, gone for that time. The only hope of sal-
vation that remained was individual and personal, which might
be entertained by some on better grounds than by others. But
of all classes, the priests and the rulers had the least reason to
expect the Divine favour, less even than publicans and harlots.
In this truth, thus plainly declared, not in anger or invective,
but as the Divine estimation, John xii. 48, 49, of their char-
acter and condition, the severity of the comparison consisted.
Having told the dignitaries of the nation, in the plainest lan-
guage, their true character and condition in the sight of God,
our Lord passes immediately to the nation itself. The transi-
tion was easy and natural. In all their generations, from the
commencement of their covenant-relations as the elect people
of God, the governing powers of the nation had been corrupt
and rebellious. It was only through the mercy and forbear-
ance of God that it had been reserved to that generation to fill
up the^ measure of their national sins. See Matt, xxiii. 30 — 32.
With equal plainness, therefore, our Lord proceeds to pronounce
the nation's punishment, which, so far as declared on this occa-
sion, consisted chiefly in the deprivation of the privileges con-
tained in the covenant of the kingdom, verse 43. This is the
drift or general import of the parable of the vineyard, verses
33 — 41. The loss, of necessity-, fell upon the people com-
posing the nation, and it came upon them mediately, or instru-
mentally, through their rulers, yet not without individual
participation in the national sins. The people, in all their
generations, had concurred in, or assented to, the sins of their
THE PARABLE OF THE VINEYARD. 255
rulers, and oftentimes instigated them; although, in the matter
of John the Baptist's ministry, their guilt did not consist in
concurring with their rulers, but in their not receiving him
with the obedience of faith. See notes on Matt. xi. 14. This
lack of faith was a sinful defect, and the cause of their similar
treatment of the Lord himself. We have seen that, from the
death of John the Baptist, our Lord changed his public min-
istry from the nation, in its public capacity, to the people, in
their individual and personal relations. He offered himself,
thenceforth, as Son of Man and Saviour to all who would
receive him; and to enforce his appeals, he wrought new
miracles more impressive upon the popular mind than any he
had previously wrought. They were even persuaded that he
was "that prophet that should come into the world." John
vi. 14; see the notes on Matt. xiv. 10, 14; xv. 30; xvi. 4.
From that time especially, if not exclusively, they were put
upon their individual personal responsibilities. Every one
who did not receive him with the obedience of the heart, was
guilty of rejecting him, and justly incm-red the penalty of the
sin. To this latter portion of our Lord's ministry, commencing
at the death of John, we suppose the parable of the marriage,
in the next chapter, especially applies, although not without
some allusion to the previous portion of it. That parable
represents the people, one and all, as making light of it, pre-
ferring their ordinary occupations and the ephemeral concerns
of this life to the glory of the kingdom he offered them. Matt,
xxiii. 5. The three parables are necessary to complete the
subject of our Lord's discourse. Taken together, they cover
the Avhole ground of condemnation, whether we consider the
people in their national capacity, and as the children of the
covenant — as rulers or subjects, or as individuals responsible
for their personal sins. They are the last our Lord publicly
delivered, and explain the reasons of the dreadful judgments
which were soon to be sent upon them. These observations
premised, we proceed with the exposition.
Matt. xxi. 33 — 41. The parable of the vineyard.
This parable may remind the reader of Isaiah v. 1 — 8, from
which the imagery of it was, perhaps, designedly borrowed.
It is an allegory of God's dealings with Israel, from the time
he entered into covenant with them, at Horeb, Exod. xix. 1 — 5,
and of their conduct, as the people of the covenant, to the close
of our Lord's ministry. But the chief or finishing stroke of
the representation is designed to set forth the end of his own
mission and the most atrocious and heaven-daring of the nation's
sins. It does not come within the purpose of these notes to
explain minutely the material circumstances of the parable, or
256 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
to trace throughout the resemblance between, the allegory and
the historical events it compendiously represents. The moral
or application of the parable is too obvious to be mistaken.
The chief priests and Pharisees plainly perceived it. They
could not fail to do so after our Lord had declared its import.
In general, it may be remarked that, by the mission of ser-
vants, verse 34, we are to understand the raising up and
sending of prophets to the people, which may be supposed to
commence with Samuel, see Acts iii. 24, in the days of Eli,
about 1130 B. c, from whose days, till the return from the
Captivity at Babylon, about 536 b. C, the succession of pro-
phets was almost, if not quite, uninterrupted.*
The book of Esther closes the canon of the Old Testament
Scriptures. By wdiom it was written we do not know; but
undoubtedly by an inspired person. After the close of the
canon we have not so sure means of tracing the succession of
heaven-sent messengers, but we have no reason to suppose that
God, at any time, left the people without prophets, or wise men,
or scribes, who were faithful witnesses of his truth, see Matt.
xxiii. 34, during the succeeding interval which was terminated
by the appearance of John. Such w^itnesses, whatever their
office or character, would be aptly represented by the servants
of the parable.
Matt. xxi. 37. "But last of all he sent his son, saying
[certainly] They will reverence my son."
It cannot be necessary to remark that the son represents our
blessed Lord himself. And when we consider the majesty of
* The reader may satisfy himself of the correctness of this remark by refer-
ring to the following passages, according to Townsend's chronological arrange-
ment of the Old Testament: 1 Sam. xxviii. 6. 15; xxii. 5; 1 Chron. xxix. 29;
2 Chron. xxix. 25; 2 Sam. xxiv. 11— U; 1 Chron. xxi. 9—13; 2 Sam. vii. 2;
1 Kings i. ; 1 Chron. ix. 29 ; xvii. 1 ; 2 Chron. xxix. 25, 29 ; 1 Kings iv. 5 ;
xi. 29; 1 Chron. ix. 29; 2 Kings xiv. 2—4; 1 Kings xiii. 1, 11—18, 10—22,
26—32; 2 Chron. ix. 29; xii. 15; xiii. 22 ; 2 Kings xii. 22; 2 Chron. xi. 2;
xii. 5, 7, 15 ; xv, 1 — 8 ; xvi. 7 ; 1 Kings xvi. 1, 7 — 12 ; 2 Chron. xix, 2 ; xx. 84 ;
1 Kings xvii 1 ; 2 Kings i. 3 ; 2 Chron. xxi. 12 — 15; 1 Kings xiv. 25: xviii.
4, 13, 19—40; xix. 16. 19—22; xvi. 33; xx. 13—22, 28, 35, 41; xxii. 8;
2 Chron. xviii. 7; 2 Kings ii. 3, 5, 7, 9—15, 16; xiii. 14—25; iv. 1, 38;
ix. 1—4 ; 2 Chron. xxiv. 20—22 ; xxv. 7, 15; Amos i. 1 : vii. 9—11 : Hos. 1. 1 ;
2 Kings xviii. 10; Isa. i. 1 ; vi. 1 ; vii. 1 ; xiv. 28; xx. 1 ; xxxv. 1 ; 2 Kings
xix. 2; 2 Chron. xxvi. 22, 5; xxviii. 9; Mic. i. 1; Jer. xxvi. 18; 2 Kings
xxi. 10; Jer. i. 2, 3; iii. 6; xxi 1; xxii. 11, 24, 28; xxv. 1, 3; xxvi. 1;
xxvii. 20 ; xliii.; 2 Chron. xxxv. 25 ; xxxvi. 21 ; Zeph. i. 1 : 2 Kings xxii. 3, 14 ;
2 Chron. xxxiv. 22 ; Jer. xxvi. 20—33 ; Ezek. i. 1, 2 ; xl. 1 ; Dan. i. 1—21 ;
vi. 28; ix. 1; x. 1 ; Hagg. i. 1, 15; ii.-l, 10, 19, 20; Zech. i. 1, 7 ; vii. 1;
Ezra V. 1; vi. 14; Neh. viii. 2, 9; xii. 26, 36; Ezra vii. 1, 7, 8; Neh. i. 1 ;
ii. 1 ; V. 14, xiii. 6; viii. 2 — 9; vi. 7, 14. Several of the foregoing references
have been repeated on account of the connection they have with others. These
references are sufficient to put the reader on the track of inquiry; and they
will throw light upon Matt, xxiii. 34, 35.
THE PARABLE OF THE VINEYARD. 257
his person as the Son of Man, the Adam of the everlasting
covenant — his Divine wisdom and his wonderful works — his
infinite superiority to the greatest of the prophets, Matt. iii. 11;
xi. 11, there would be great reason to anticipate his favourable
reception. The result of our Lord's ministry among the Jews
proves beyond all doubt the incurable depravity of the human
heart, except by the creative energies of the Holy Spirit, and
this is vividly represented by the reasoning ascribed to the
husbandmen in the parable. Reverence they had none, and
the householder erred in calculating upon it. In this point the
analogy of the parable fails. The issue of our Lord's mission
was not only certainly foreknown, but predetermined in the
Divine counsels. Acts ii. 23; xv. 18. Our Lord, therefore,
designed merely to intimate the reasonableness of such expecta-
tions according to man's judgment — the guilt of the husbandmen
in disappointing them — and the equity of the Divine procedure
even when considered according to the low standard of earthly
analogies. It was with this view of the circumstance, as we
conceive, the Evangelist records the response of the people,
verse 41.*
Matt. xxi. 39. " And they caught him, and cast him out
of the vineyard, and slew him." See Luke xx. 15; Mark
xii. 8.
We incline to believe our Lord, in these words, had especial
allusion to his approaching sufferings without the city. Heb.
xiii. 12. There was a typical exigency for his suffering without
the gate, which he might well represent in this circumstance of
the parable. Mark, it is true, differs from the other Evangelists
in representing the husbandmen as first killing the son, and
then casting him out of the vineyard: and perhaps we should
* There appears to be a discrepancy between the Evangelists in this par-
ticular. Matthew ascribes the answer in verse 41 to the people ; Mark and
Luke ascribe it to our Lord himself. We suppose both records are correct.
Both answers may have been given — one by some of the bystanders, as Mat-
thew relates, and the other by our Lord, as Mark and Luke relate, or our
Lord may have adopted the answer of the bystanders, incorporating it, as he
proceeded, into his own discourse. However this may be, the discrepancy
proves that the stress of the passage does not lie on this circumstance. As
uttered by our Lord, the words are prophetical. As used by the people,
they express merely the reasonableness of such punishment. It was more
important to Matthew's purpose to record the popular judgment upon the case
represented, than the prophecy, because the prophecy involved in the words,
as useil by our Lord, is supplied by another declaration in the 43d and 44th
verses, and also by the parable of the marriage, which he proceeds immediately
to record. Matt. xxii. 7. Whereas the other Evangelists omit the parable of
the marriage, as well as the response of the bystanders, and our Lord's other
declaration, recorded by Matthew in the 43d verse, substituting for all these
the Saviour's declaration of the punishment the Lord of the vineyard would
inflict upon the husbandmen.
33
258 NOTES ON SCRIPTUKE.
account for this discrepancy, as we did for that just noticed, by
supposing that the stress of the parable does not, in any degree,
lie upon this circumstance. We prefer, however, another
explanation. Mark wrote his Gospel for the use of Gentile
churches. It was not important to his purpose, nor was it his
intention, as we suppose, to affirm the order of the events, or do
more than specify the fact itself, which he does in substantial
consistency with the record of Matthew. Either statement
shows a contempt of the rights of the son, and equal indignity
to his person, which was all that Mark intended to show. But
Matthew wrote his Gospel especially for the Hebrew Christians,
who were more or less familiar with the typical signification of
their ritual. On this assumption Paul reasons, in the passage
just before cited from Heb. xiii. 11, 12. It was more important,
therefore, for such readers to record with orderly exactness
this part of the parable, knowing the use that would be made of
it as an argument with that people. Hence we conclude that,
while neither Evangelist contradicts the other, the especial
views with which they wrote, satisfactorily account for the
difference between them in this as well as many other par-
ticulars.
The reader will observe, that the crime of ejecting and killing
the Son, is ascribed wholly to (the Jews) the hrsbandmen. In
the Divine regard, they were the authors of it, though the
Romans acted concurrently with the Jewish rulers, and so the
apostle Peter charged it upon them. Acts ii. 23; iii. 17, 18;
V. 30. There was a needs-be, that the nation should disown
his rights and their obligations before the Roman governor
could have any power over him. John xix. 11, and see notes on
that verse. We observe also, the tranquillity with which our
Lord vividly depicts his impending sufferings. He was speaking
the words of the Father as his minister, not his own words.
John xii. 49, 50 ; xiii. 21. On another occasion, during the
same day, he spake of them as a man having the susceptibilities
of our nature with the deepest emotions. See John xii. 27.
Matt. XXI. 42. "Jesus saith unto them: Did ye never read
in the Scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the
same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's
doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?"
Luke's narrative is more graphic. After relating the parable,
and the question the Lord put upon it, he represents him as
answering his own question, which drew from some of the
bystanders a deprecatory response which gave occasion for this
quotation from Psalm cxviii. 22, 23. We may paraphrase the
passage thus : " What then shall the Lord of the vineyard do to
these husbandmen? I will tell you what he will do to them:
THE PARABLE OF THE VINEYARD. 259
He "will come and destroy them and give the vineyard to
others." Hearing this, some of them exclaimed, God forbid it.
But He, looking intently (i//^Ae^ac) at them, said, Does the
punishment seem to you severe? What then is the meaning
of this that is written in- the Psalms: the stone that the
builders rejected as unworthy a place in God's building, the
same has become, in spite of them, the very head-stone of the
corner.
Substantially, the three Evangelists agree ; all of them nar-
rate the quotation in connection with the parable, and as exposi-
tory of its meaning. Luke shows its particular connection with
what was said before. The seeming discrepancy arises from
the different degrees of particularity observed by the Evange-
lists, in narrating the same matter. It has already been suffi-
ciently explained. See last note.
The quotation is from one of the Messianic Psalms ; it is an
allegory taken from architecture, as the parable is from the
business of agriculture carried on by tenants. Both figures
are combined by Paul in 1 Cor. iii. 9. "For we are co-laborers
with God" in cultivating his vineyard — in erecting his building,
the Church. See Matt. xvi. 18. "Ye are God's husbandry,"
or tillage, "Ye are God's building." A building is, perhaps,
the most common figure of the true Church, 1 Pet. ii. 5; Eph.
ii. 20 — 22; iv. 16; 1 Cor. iii. 16 ; vi. 19, taken, as we suppose,
from our Lord's declaration. Matt. xvi. 18: "On this founda-
tion (oixodopr^aco) I ivill build my Church," &c. The quotation
. we are considering implies, that Israel, as a nation, were first
chosen as the builders. Their election to this service was con-
nected with exceeding great and glorious promises, but proving
unfaithful to their trust in all their generations, they forfeited
their privileges, and God was about not only to take them
away, but inflict condign punishment, as the Lord had solemnly
declared at the conclusion of the parable. Luke xx. 16;
Mark xii. 9.
Matt. xxi. 43. " Therefore \_Jta touto, for this reason] I
say unto you, The kingdom of God, which was first promised to
you as a nation, shall be taken from you," [as a nation, and]
"shall be given [i^vs;] to a nation bringing forth [tioiouijtc,
making or producing] the fruits thereof."
This declaration of the Saviour is recorded only by Matthew.
It stands in immediate connection with the quotation from the
one hundred and eighteenth Psalm, and sets forth in the plainest
language, the import and bearing of the parable. The last
clause of the verse, "bringing forth the fruits thereof," shows
the connection. The chief priests and the pharisees, if they
doubted about the meaning before, could doubt no longer,
260 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
verse 45. We might, perhaps, without marring the sense,
transpose this verse, so as to read it in connection with the
41st and the 44th verses, in connection with the 42d — although
we conceive the actual arrangement was designed to interlock
the quotation from the Psalm with the parable, and then to
declare the moral or import of both in their order.
However this may be, the verse, taken in connection with
the preceding context, declares the result of the legal dispensa-
tion, which is the great lesson of the parable. That dispensa-
tion commenced at Horeb, the place which Israel reached on
the forty-seventh day after their exodus from Egypt, amidst
the most wonderful displays of the Divine presence, favour,
and power. While encamped at that place, the law was de-
livered to them, and they were brought into new covenant
relations with God, Moses being the mediator. Gal. iii. 19. It
will be instructive to dwell a little on this subject.
The blessings which God covenanted to bestow on Israel,
upon the condition of their obedience, are here summed by the
Saviour in the words "The kingdom of God" — for it was the
kingdom of Grod he declared should be taken from them in
consequence of their unfaithfulness, according to the repre-
sentation of the parable. The substance of the covenant is
contained in Exod. vi. 7, 8, and more fully in Exod. xix. 5, 6, 8.
"I will take you to me for a people, and I will be to you a
God." "Now, therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and
keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto
me, above all people: for all the earth is mine. And ye shall
be unto me a kingdom of priests and an holy nation." And all
the people answered together, and said, "All that the Lord
hath spoken, we will do. See Exod. xxiv. 3 — 8. The covenant
thus concluded was a continuing covenant. It embraced not
only that generation, but their posterity to the remotest period.
This is virtually asserted in Deut. v. 2, 3, " The Lord our God
made a covenant with us in Horeb. The Lord hath made not
this covenant with our fathers, but with us, even us who are all
of us alive this day." See Exod. xxiii. 20, 25; xxix. 45, 46;
xxxiii. 16; Deut.iv. 7, 20, 23, 31, 34; vii. 6—9; x. 15; xiv. 2;
xxvii. 9, 10; xxix. 9 — 13; xxvi. 17, 18. This covenant was
renewed at Shechem in the time of Joshua, Josh. xxiv. 22 — 25,
and many years afterwards in the reign of Joash, 2 Kings
xi. 17; 2 Chron. xxiii. 16; and again in the reign of Josiah.
2 Kings xxiii. 2, 3; 2 Chron. xxxiv. 30, 31; Jer. xi. 1 — 10.
It was renewed in the days of Asa, 2 Chron. xv. 12, and again
in the. days of Nehemiah, ISTeh. xi. and x., and this renewal is
one of the last events recorded by inspiration in the public
history of that people. Strictly, therefore, it was not only a
THE PARABLE OF THE VINEYARD. 261
national, but a continuing covenant — running with the race of
Israel and embracing that people in all their generations. The
mission of John the Baptist presupposed that the covenant with
the nation still subsisted, and his baptism and preaching repent-
ance assumed that the national repentance and faith and hearty
compliance with the covenant on the part of the whole people,
should secure to that generation the covenanted blessings, not-
withstanding the sins of their forefathers. Nay more, the Lord
assured them, that it was because they not only yielded no
fruits, but, in the words of the parable, were about to kill the
son and heir, that the kingdom would be taken from them.
The covenant then was a subsisting one, and the parable
teaches us, on the one hand, that the nation had continually
broken it in all their generations, and on the other, that God
had forborne with them, and as it were held himself bound by
his promises until that time, though he might justly have cast
the whole nation off, generations before, as he did ten of their
tribes, and would have done so with the rest had it not been for
his covenant with David. Jer. xxxiii. 17; 1 Kings viii. 25;
2 Chron. vi. 16. But now the time had come when he would
forbear no lorfger. The covenant with David he had fulfilled
so far as to raise up the Messiah from his seed, and send him
to the nation. He was the Son mentioned in the parable.
By rejecting him and putting him to death, that generation
filled up the measure of Divine forbearance to their nation,
Matt, xxiii. 32, and the covenanted kingdom was declared to
be forfeited.
By the kingdom of God, our Lord alludes especially, as we
suppose, to the words in Exod. xix. 6. "Ye shall be unto me
a kingdom of priests." However this may be, we cannot be
mistaken in supposing that the kingdom of God had been
committed to that people in some especial sense, Rom. ix. 4, 5,
or at least that the nation stood in some peculiar relation to it;
as the husbandmen did to the vineyard. If it were not so, we
see not how the kingdom of God could have been taken from
them, and given to another nation. That the kingdom of God
was not theirs by right of ownership, is too plain to be
argued. The nature of the promise forbids us to suppose
any other privilege than that of eminent service, and the
exalted glory and happiness connected with such service. We
infer this from the words last quoted from Exod. xix. 6. " Ye
shall be unto me a kingdom of priests," — a promise which
reminds us of Rev. i. 6 ; v. 10 ; xx. 6; 1 Pet. ii. 9; passages
which we may regard as expository of the words of this
covenant. Adopting this as the meaning, God's covenant with
the people was, that he would make it the honoured instrument
262 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
in his hand of bringing back to the world his kingdom, which
it should be their privilege first to enter, and then, under the
Messiah, to administer. See Dan. vii. 27. Hence the kingdom
was first preached to them. Matt. iii. 2 ; iv. 17, and not until
it waF rej?cted, could it be taken from them and given to others,
Matt. X. 6 ; xv. 24 ; Rom. xv. 8, 27.
But observe, the Lord does not say the kingdom shall be
taken from them and given {k&vtac) to the Cientiles or to all
nations, but (iduei) to a nation — another nation, not named on
this occasion, or in any way designated. The minds of the
bystanders would naturally be directed by this language to some
other contemporary nation, to be elected or chosen as Israel
had been. Or some of them, remembering what God had said
to Moses, Numb. xiv. 12; Deut. ix. 14, might have supposed
him to mean, that God would choose some individual, as he
chose Abraham and Jacob, and raise up from him a nation to
whom he would transfer the kingdom. Either supposition
would not be an unnatural inference from this expression;
and a nation so chosen, or raised up, would be an elect
people, in the same sense that Israel was. Our Lord, however,
tacitly alluded to a nation, to be elected and gathered out of
all nations, during a long succession of generations, according
to the foreknowledge of God, and prepared for it through
sanctification of the Spirit, 1 Pet. i. 2, into which all those who
had been given to him by the Father in the covenant of
redemption should enter, and no others — in one word, his
Church. The idea he does not develope. It was the fiict only
of the substitution of another nation in the place of Israel,
which he now declares. In his intercessory prayer, the elect
people, intended in this place under the idea or description of
a nation, are much more distinctly referred to.
But what we desire the reader particularly to notice is, that
the original plan of committing the kingdom, in the sense
explained, to one nation, chosen out of all the nations, is not
abandoned in consequence of the unfaithfulness of the nation
first chosen. That is not the method of the Divine adminis-
tration. Of the march of Divine Providence it may truly be
said, Nulla vestigia retrorsu?n. The owner of the vineyard did
not resolve to destroy it or abandon it, or throw it open to the
first occupant in consequence of the bad faith and wickedness
of the first tenants. His plan he persists in. The only change
he makes is in the persons he employs to execute his original
design. So in the interpretation of the parable. The only
change to be made, is the substitution of one nation, repre-
sented by a company of tenants, for another, though raised
up and constituted by a difierent method. The first was elected
THE PARABLE OF THE VINEYARD. 263
as a race according to the flesh — the second are begotten of
God, by the Spirit. John i. 13; James i. 18. The first
appeared visibly on earth from the time they were first chosen
as an organized people, and continued visible through many
generations. The second has ever been, and still is, without a
local habitation or a name among the nations. The greater
portion of it has passed the gates of death. Some are passing
now, and some, perhaps many, are yet to come into being.
Those composing the fragment of it now on eai-th, comparatively
but a small number, are scattered as wheat growing among
tares, with no marks of distinction but the fruits of the king-
dom they bear. Nor are they to be gathered during the
present order of things, and visibly appear as one body. The
gates of Hades which conceal them must first be unbarred,
Matt. xvi. 18, and the Lord himself appear in his glory to
establish his kingdom, and judge the nations,* before their
number can be consummated, and they can appear. Matt,
xvi. 18.
Those who understand by the kingdom of God, the present
dispensation of the Gospel among all nations, conclude, con-
sistently enough with their theory, that the promises first made
exclusively to Israel, are to be bestowed upon all nations, with-
out discrimination, but in doing so they disregard the obvious
import of the words of the Saviour; for admitting that in
consequence of the fall of Israel, the kingdom of God is to be
preached to all nations and to every creature. Matt, xxviii.
19, 20; Mark xvi. 15, yet it follows not that all will receive it;
on the contrary, our Lord teaches with express reference to
this dispensation, that although the many are called, few only
are chosen, Matt. xvii. 14, and the chosen ones only enter into
that elect nation, upon which the kingdom promised to Israel
will be conferred.
It is plain, also, that if those specific blessings, which were
conditionally promised to Israel at Horeb — the same that the
Saviour solemnly declared should be taken from them, and
given to another nation — are to be conferred on all nations
indiscriminately, or upon all nations considered as one nation,
at any time during the progress of the present dispensation,
then the Divine purpose is, to make all nations a peculiar
people unto him, above all people, and a kingdom of priests ; a
supposition which is repugnant to the words of the promise, as
well as the words of the Saviour. But this argument we shall
more fully consider hereafter.
* That this elect people, though now invisible, and even without a local
habitation or a name on earth, may yet be called a nation, (iflroc) is proved by
1 Pet. ii. 9. See notes on Acts ii. 47.
264 NOTES ON SCRIPTUKE.
Matt. xxi. 44. " And whosoever shall fall on this stone,
shall be broken, [^cruudXaod^aezac, dashed into pieces] but on
whomsoever it shall fall, it shall grind him to powder,"
[^?.cx/u7^(7£i, make chaff of him, and scatter him to the winds.
See Robinson's Lex. New Test. Comp. Dan. ii. 44 in LXX.]
Luke XX. 18.
The stone is frequently employed as an emblem of Christ.
It is so employed in this verse, and in Ps. cxviii. 22, 23,
quoted in the 42d verse. In Gen. xlix. 24, Christ is called
"The Shepherd, the Stone of Israel." In Zech. iv. 7, he is
called the Head Stone. Isaiah, viii. 13, 14, 15, foreseeing his
rejection by Israel, calls him a stone of stumbling and rock of
offence, (see 1 Pet. ii. 6 — 8; Rom. ix. 33; Acts iv. 11; Eph.
ii. 20 ; and Daniel, ii. 34, 45,) evidently refers to the Messiah
under the emblem of a stone cut out of the mountain without
hands. The verse we are considering comprises the totality of
the present dispensation of the Gospel. In the first clause of
it, our Lord refers, as we doubt not, to Isaiah viii. 14, 15,
which was eminently fulfilled in the fall of Israel, and the
breaking up and continued dispersion of the nation by the
Romans. Regarded as a prophecy, it denotes the events more
plainly described in the next parable, under the imagery of a
captured and burned city. Matt. xxii. 7. The prediction has
also been fulfilled in the uninterrupted calamities the Jews
have suffered in all their generations since that event, in con-
sequence of their hitherto abiding blindness and unbelief.
Luke xxi. 22 — 24. Thus understood, how fearfully significant
is this prediction!
In the last clause of this verse, our Lord refers, as we sup-
pose, to the prophecy of Daniel, ii. 31 — 45, and especially to
verses 34 and 45. He points us to the end of the times of the
Gentiles, Luke xxi. 24, and those terrible judgments which are
to precede the restoration of Israel, and the dispensation of the
restitution of all things.*
These judgments, we are taught, will fall in their intensity
upon the nations symbolized by the image, Dan. ii. 31 — 38, or,
as Paul teaches, 2 Thess. i. 8, 9, upon those in Christian lands,
who are living in heathen ignorance of God, notwithstanding
the Gospel has been fully preached among them.
The fourth kingdom represented in the image, Dan. ii. 40,
is, by the almost universal consent of interpreters, understood
to be the Roman Empire, as it ex-isted at the commencement of
our era. Its bounds, as then established, comprise Christendom
* Compare this clause with Dan. ii. 45, in the Greek: Ka/ * ^aaiKux aLtou
THE PARABLE OF THE VINEYARD. 265
in its largest extent in any age. Hence, we understand the
apostle and the prophet as referring to the same judgments.
But what we would especially remark is, the discriminative
justice of the Divine administration, and the difference which
these words of the Saviour put between the breakers of the
law, and those who abuse the grace of the Gospeh Severe as
were the judgments which came upon Israel, they were not
utterly destructive. Though the nation, by falling on this
stone, was broken, and scattered to the four winds of heaven ;
and although the days of vengeance have come upon that
people, in which all things written by Moses, Deut. xxviii.
15 — 68, and the prophets, shall be fulfilled, Luke xxi. 22, yet
they have been, and are still preserved, as a race of men ; and
when these days shall be ended, they shall be restored, Deut.
XXX. 1 — 6, to their land and the Divine favour, and a new
covenant shall be made with them, different from the covenant
made with their fathers, Heb. viii. 8 — 13; Jer. xxxi. 31 — 34,
■while a full end shall be made of all the nations upon which
the stone shall fall. Jer. xlvi. 27, 28 ; Dan. ii. 35, 45. See
vii. 11; see Heb. x. 28, 29.
Matt. xxi. 45. "And the chief-priests and Pharisees hear-
ing his parables, knew that he spake of them."
With design the Evangelist throws in this observation at this
place, and not at the conclusion of the parable of the marriage,
which he proceeds immediately to record. The parable of
the two sons, our Lord pointedly applied to the chief-priests
and elders of the people ; including, no doubt, all who con-
curred with them in their principles and conduct. The parable
of the householder, and the vineyard, also, had an especial
reference to the ruling classes, including those who exercised
offices of instruction ; although the people, generally, partook
deeply of the national sins. The whole nation were, in the
general sense of the parable, "husbandmen and builders," for
it was with the people as well as the rulers, the covenant,
Exod. xix. 5, 6, 8, was made. Yet, the priests, teachers, and
rulers, to whom the power of government and instruction had
been committed, were, in a special sense, the husbandmen and
builders ; and by reason of their authority and controlling
influence, chiefly responsible for the sin and unbelief of the
nation. Matt, xxiii. 13. In this sense, the chief-priests and
Pharisees understood the Saviour, and rightly, as we infer from
this passage. The parable of the marriage, in the next
chapter, on the other hand, as has been already said, was
designed to apply to all classes, without distinction; not to the
influential or governing classes in particular, and this remark
34
266 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
of the Evangelist discriminates between them in their appli-
cation.
Matt. xxir. The parable of the marriage.
This is the last of our Lord's public parables. It was pro-
nounced, as the last two mentioned were, in the temple at
Jerusalem, just before his final departure from it. It is an
allegory consisting of two parts ; the first part ending at (verse 7)
the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans, a. d. 70, and the
second, stretching forward through the whole of the present
dispensation of the gospel among the Gentiles, down to the
second coming of the Lord, and the gathering of his elect people
to himself. It is a similitude of the kingdom of heaven, but
altogether different in its design from those recorded in the
thirteenth chapter of this Gospel. The action of the parable
commences at the earliest with the preaching of John the
Baptist. By the marriage festival we understand the peculiar
blessings included in the covenant Jehovah made with Israel at
Horeb. See notes on the last parable.
By the invitation to the marriage, we understand the call
made by John, and our Lord and his apostles, upon the nation
to perform the conditions of that covenant by receiving the
kingdom and its King with the obedience of faith. The first
invited guests were all those whom John was sent to baptize —
the whole nation, without distinction or exception. The
servants first sent forth (verse 3) had executed their commission,
when John was put to death. Matt. xiv. 1 — 13. See notes on
that passage. The other servants (verse 4) had executed their
commission when Jerusalem, on the eve of its overthrow, was
encompassed by the Roman armies, A. D. 70. The 8th verse
is a formal repudiation of Israel, as the elect people under the
covenant of law, Hos. i. 9, which became irrevocable and
complete when the temple was destroyed, and the people
dispersed among all nations by the sword of the Romans. Luke
xxi. 24. The theocracy was then entirely withdrawn, and Jew
and Gentile were placed absolutely on the same level, in respect
to the Divine proceedings shadowed forth in the 9th and 10th
verses of the parable. See the notes on Acts iii. 19 — 21. For
after those events, that people could be found only on "the
highways and hedges," Luke xiv. 23, and if brought to the
marriage at all, must be brought from thence, with such
others as were found willing to obey the command of the
King's servants.
Consider again the brevity with which the greatest events
the world has witnessed are represented. The whole history of
the preaching of the gospel, from the fall of Jerusalem, hangs
on these two verses, 9th and 10th. To mention only a few of
THE PARABLE OF THE MARRIAGE. 267
tliem : — (1) The persecutions under Domitian, A. D. 94;* under
Trajan, a. d. 155; Antonine, A. D. 164; Septimius Severus,
A. D. 205; Maximin, A. D. 235; Decius, a. d. 251; Valerian,
A. D. 255; Aurelian, a. d. 270; and Diocletian, a. d. 303.
Next, (2) the establishment of Christianity bj Constantine,
A. D. 323, as the religion of the Roman Empire. (3) The rise
of the Papacy, and its progress to unbounded power. (4) The
corruption of Christian doctrine by Arians and other heretics ;
by Popes and councils. (5) The Reformation from Popery ;
the rise and progress of the Protestant churches ; and (6) the
more recent Christian missions to Pagan countries; and the
translating, printing, and distributing of the Bible among all
nations. All these, and many more particulars, are not
brought into view by the parable. Nor does it notice, in
any form, the actings of those who have gone forth as servants
of the king, without being sent by him. For these we must
turn to another parable. Matt. xiii. 25. This parable has
respect only to the true servants of the king, and their
accomplished work, without any allusion to the impediments
they were to meet with, or the persecutions they were to suffer
in performing it
In harmony with this characteristic of the parable, is the
time of its action. It is brief, yet undefined, in respect of its
duration. The imagery is taken from the economy of human
life, and considered as an actual occurrence, the whole repre-
sentation would be reasonably circumscribed within a single
day, or even an hour, according to the diligence and success of
the king's servants. During a brief interval only, the enter-
tainment already prepared and ready to be served up, can be
supposed to wait. As soon as the servants have executed the
king's command, he appears. The representation of the parable,
in this respect, is in harmony with the doctrine of the uncer-
tainty of the time of our Lord's coming. Mark. xiii. 32;
Matt. xxiv. 36. It depends, if we may so say, upon the full
execution of the commission which the Lord gave the apostles,
and through them to all his servants and followers. Matt.
xxviii. 19; Mark xvi. 15; ^J.att. xxiv. 14. When that elect
people who, in the Divine purpose, have been substituted in the
place of Israel, shall be fully gathered, then the Lord will
appear in the midst of them and celebrate that marriage festival
which this parable represents. See Rev. xix. 9.
Commentators have noticed the likeness between this parable
* That under Nero, a. d. 66, occurred while Jerusalem was standing, and
during the period which we have allotted to the second mission of the servants,
verse 4.
268 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
and that of the Great Supper. Luke xiv. 15 — 24. That parable
is, in truth, a similitude of the kingdom of heaven, although it
was not put forth as such. It shows the manner in which the
Jewish nation, and the Jews individually, refused the kingdom
when it was preached to them by John and our Lord, verses
16 — 20. It shadows forth, also, the present dispensation of
the Gospel among the Gentiles, verses 21 — 24. But the para-
ble under consideration, so far as it respects the Jews as the
elect people, is more specific. It was pronounced as a simili-
tude of the kingdom which had been preached to them exclu-
sively ; and, consequently, they only were represented by the
first invited guests. And when our Lord comes to speak of
the judgments which their national and individual sins were
about to bring upon them, he almost drops the drapery of the
parable, that he might show them not only the nature of these
judgments, but the form in which they would come, verse T.
Their city should be burned, and they themselves should be
destroyed by the armies which their King, whom they had dis-
honoured and contemned, would send upon them. It is to be
noticed, also, that in the parable of the Great Supper, our
Lord does not represent the occasion upon which it was made,
nor does he denote the character or rank of the person who
made it; nor does it appear that any particular relation sub-
sisted between him and the guests he invited. It was addressed
to an individual, at a private entertainment, in reply to an
observation which implied a too confident expectation of enjoy-
ing the blessings of the kingdom. This parable, on the other
hand, is founded upon the relation between a king and his sub-
jects. The occasion was an extraordinary one, intimately
connected with the honour of the king, and of the heir of his
throne. The dishonour done him by his subjects was a breach
of their allegiance for which they deserved, and received, severe
punishment. As before suggested, it is the complement of the
two preceding parables, and was added to show the grounds of
the Divine judgments as they affected all classes of the people,
without discrimination between the rulers and the ruled. Thus
much upon the scope and general import of this parable. We
now proceed to submit a few observations on some of the
particulars.
Matt. XXII. 2. "The kingdom of heaven is like unto a
certain king which made a marriage for his son."
As the marriage was not celebrated at the time first appointed,
on account of the unworthy behaviour of the invited guests, but
deferred for a little space, until other guests could be invited
and assembled: so the kingdom of heaven would not be esta-
blished at its first announcement, on account of the unworthiness
THE PARABLE OF THE MARRIAGE. 269
of the Jews, to whom it was promised and preached, but would
be deferred until another people could be called and substituted
in their place.
Matt. xxii. 3. "And sent forth his servants to call them
that were [had been] bidden to the wedding, and they would
not come."
The action of the parable commences, as before suggested,
with the mission and ministry of John the Baptist. Previously
to John, the prophets had preached the kingdom of God as
future. Matt. xi. 13; Luke xvi. 16. John first announced it
as nigh, and ready to be established. Matt. iii. 2 ; Mark i. 15.
This act of the parable, the first mission of the king's servants,
extends, as has been said, to the death of John. Matt. xiv. 10.
It includes the first mission of the twelve apostles. Matt, x.,
who, as we have seen, returned from it at the death of John.
Mai'k vi. 30; see notes on Matt. xiv. 10. During this period
the call was made upon the nation as such ; but this included
an individual or personal call on every Jew to whom the king-
dom was preached, just as the baptism of John, which was
appointed for the nation, see notes on Matt. iii. 6; and 1 Cor.
X. 2, was individual or personal in its administration. In this
latter sense chiefly we understand the call intended in the
parable. See John i. 11, 12. But "they [the people] would
not come."
During this period none of the preachers of the kingdom
suffered death at the hands of the people. John was put to
death by Herod at the instigation of Herodias, through motives
of private revenge, several months after his public ministry was
ended. See notes on Luke iii. 20, 21. The sin of the people
in respect to John's ministry consisted chiefly in their not
receiving him with the obedience of faith.
Matt. xxii. 4. "Again he sent forth other servants, say-
ing : Tell them which are bidden : Behold, I have prepared my
dinner; my oxen and my fallings are killed, and all things are
ready: come to the marriage."
Interpreting this parable in accordance with the distinctions
taken in preceding notes, (see notes on Matt. xiv. 10; xv. 30;
xviii. 11, foot-note,) the second mission of the servants, which
may be called the second act of the parable, commenced at the
death of John and ended at the destruction of Jerusalem ; con-
sequently it includes the latter portion of our Lord's public
ministry, the mission of the seventy disciples, Luke x., and the
"whole ministry of all the apostles, except the apostle John,
under their second commission. AVhile our Lord remained with
them, none of them suffered death or violence. John xvii. 12 ;
xviii. 8, 9. After his death persecutions arose. Stephen was
270 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
Stoned, Acts vii. 59 ; viii. 1 ; Herod vexed some of the Church
and killed James. Acts xii. 1, 2. The Acts of the Apostles
and the Epistles of Paul contain abundant evidence that perse-
cutions of the apostles and their disciples, by the Jews, were
rife and unrelenting, which Paul alleges as a reason why the
wrath of God was about to break forth against that people, and
abide upon them [ec^ zeXoc;) until the end, i. e. auovo^. 1 Thess.
ii. 14 — 16. Their cruel treatment of the servants of "the king"
was the filling up of their sins, and provoked him to destroy
them and their city.
Matt. xxii. 5. " But [aiizXr^aavre^, neglecting or paying no
attention to the call] they made light of it, and went their ways,
one to his farm, and another to his merchandise."
Of those called or invited, there were two classes. The one
merely made light of, or neglected the invitation, preferring
their ordinary avocations to the honour their king proffered
them. This was probably a numerous and perhaps much the
largest class. To such the apostle seems to allude iu Heb.
ii. 3.*
Matt. xxii. 6. "And the remnant" \ol oe Xocr.oc^ but the
rest, namely those who did not merely neglect the call] " took
his servants, and entreated them spitefully, and slew them."
The representation in this verse compels us to extend this
second mission of the servants to the destruction of Jerusalem.
Historical facts would not justify the representation if this
second mission terminated before our Lord's ascension; for
none of the king's servants were slain until after that event.
Besides it has been shown, see notes on Acts iii. 19 — 21, that
while the temple stood, and the worship of it was permitted,
and the rites of their law allowed to Jewish converts by the
apostles, the Jews had not entirely lost their prerogative. See
Acts xiii. 46. Peter addressed them as still " the children of
the prophets and of the covenant God made with their fathers,"
Acts iii. 25, and see Rom. ix. 1 — 5, and promised them, even
then, the second mission of Jesus Christ upon the condition of
their national repentance and faith. This interpretation is
* Ila>; yiiu.ii( fK:*>iu^o/us^oi thkumth; iy.iKmTAV'rK ooaca^) of thy coming?" The disciples had been with him
in the temple, Matt, xxiii. 1, and it is probable had left it with
him. They had heard his parting words: "Ye shall not see
me henceforth till ye say. Blessed is he that cometh in the
name of the Lord." Ps. cxviii. 26. This declaration implied
that his ministry at Jerusalem was ended, and that he was
about to withdraw from the city, and remain absent from it, at
least for a time, the length of which would depend upon the
disposition of the people towards him. But it contained no
intimation of the place he was about to retire to, nor of any
sign or token of his return, after the people should be willing
to receive him. On these points, or such as these, the disciples
desired him to speak ; but their own conceptions of them, we
are justified by other passages in saying, were very imperfect.
We must not suppose the disciples had in their mind the Lord's
appearance from heaven in glory and power, or that they
intended to inquire about such an appearance. They did not
at that time even know whither he was going; but wherever it
might be, it is probable they expected to accompany him, and
remain with, and return with him. This is evident from John
xiii. 36, 37; xiv. 5; xvi. 17, 18, 28, 29. They had no con-
312 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
ception or thought of his going out of the world, nor of the
means by which his exit from the world would be accomplis^hed.
John XX. 9; Luke xviii. 34; xxiv. 21. We must therefore
understand the word {Ttapouaca^) translated coming, in its pri-
mary signification, of being jjresent,* in his jjt'oper person, as in
2 Cor. vii. 6, 7, where Paul speaks of the coming {rcapooaca) of
Titus. See 1 Cor. xvi. 17; 2 Cor. x. 10; Philip, i. 26; ii. 12,
where it is used as the contrasting word to dnouaca, being
absent. His being present again after a period of absence
implied his return from some place of which they were igno-
rant; and nothing more is involved in the question, or can be
intended, when we consider how little the disciples at that time
knew of the future. Nor did these disciples comprehend the
answer of our Lord to their questions, at least in some of its
most important particulars, until they received the inspiration
of the Holy Spirit. This will appear if we consider that Peter,
who was one of them, two days afterwards did not know why
he could not then follow his Master to the place whither he was
going. John xiii. 36, 37; xiv. 5; xvi. 17, 18, 28, 29.
Their third question respected the ending {tol) ahovoz) of the
world. It is not improbable that many readers mistake the
meaning of the disciples in this inquiry. It is reasonable to
suppose, that with the rest of their countrymen, they believed
that the Levitical economy which they then enjoyed, would
terminate and merge in the kingdom of the Messiah ; and as
they fully believed that he was the Messiah, and had confessed
him as such. Matt. xvi. 16, 17, they naturally connected his
return and the establishment of his kingdom, not only with the
ending of the [aluju) economy under which they then lived, but
with a new one, far more happy and glorious. Acts i. 6. We
need not inquire what changes they supposed would be wrought
in the transition. They had heard out of the law, that the
Christ, when he should take possession of his throne and king-
dom, Avould abide for ever, John xii. 34; that his kingdom was
an everlasting kingdom, that shall not pass aAvay or be de-
stroyed; that it should be universal and exceedingly glorious.
* The word Tr^ova-ta is several times used in the Epistles to signify our
Lord's appearance trom heaven; 1 Cor. xv. 23; 1 Thess. ii. 19; iii. 13; iv. 15;
V. 23; 2 Thess. ii. 1, 8; James v. 7, 8; 2 Pet. i. 16; iii. 4; 1 John ii. 28, and
when so used it is synonymous witli i7rii^) includes the whole {dpyvj
ip Tco Xaoi xourco) of the wrath foretold against that people,
which, as Mr. Alford remarks, " is yet being inflicted, and
the treading down of Jerusalem by the Gentiles, is still going
on."
Besides these arguments, derived from the texts, there is
another of great force, founded upon God's method of dealing
with Jews and Gentiles, which is distinctly noticed by St. Paul
in Rom. xi. 30, 31, 33, and see verses 11 and 12, 19—22;
i. 16. This method hitherto has been characterized by alter-
nations of mercy and judgment ; first to the Jew, and then to
the Gentile. , The period of Judah's desolation is the appointed
period of mercy to the Gentiles, and of the preaching of the
Gospel to them for the gathering of an elect people into the
place of Israel, under the covenant at Horeb. This period,
which is now current, cannot therefore coincide to any extent
THE ADVENT OF THE SON OF MAN. 323
with the period of distress which the Saviour here foretells.
The very purpose for which this period of mercy was appointed,
evinces that it cannot take place until the Church shall have
been fully gathered ; consequently it must follow the excision
and reprobation of the Gentiles — an act of judgment which
shall sooner or later be performed — for the same reason that
the Jews were cut off, namely, the abuse of the privileges
bestowed upon them. But to proceed:
How long this period of the distress of the nations, when it
shall have commenced, will continue, is a secret hidden in the
Divine mind. That it will be brief compared with the period
of Jerusalem's desolation, may perhaps be inferred from the
magnitude and the glory of the purposes to be accomplished in
the dispensation of the Gospel to the Gentiles. See Isaiah liii.
11 : Rev. vii. 9. It may be, that during this period, Israel will
be restored to the land of the covenant, in order to their being
afterwards converted and constituted into a new and more glo-
rious earthly theocracy than the former was ; and if such be the
Divine purpose, it would be analogical with the purpose to be
accomplished during the period of Jerusalem's desolation, viz.
the gathering of an elect nation out of the Gentiles, to be con-
stituted into a heavenly theocracy, or a kingdom of kings and
priests. But this is offered simply as a conjecture, the value
of which depends upon the support it receives from the predic-
tions of the ancient prophets. We confess to the belief, how-
ever, that some great purpose, besides merely that of inflicting
judgments upon the nations, will be accomplished during this
period; and also to our ignorance, what that purpose can
be, unless that which we have suggested. See Dan. xii. 1
and 12.
IV. The next period is that of the visible advent of the Son
of Man in the clouds of heaven, Matt. xxiv. 30, 31; Mark
xiii. 26, 27; Luke xxi. 27, with which we connect the judgment
of the nations. Matt. xxv. 31 — 46. Not that we suppose the
judgment of the nations described in thq latter passage will
immediately succeed upon the advent described in the former
of these passages. On the contrary, there may be a very long
interval between them, to be filled up with the greatest imagin-
able events. All the things predicted by the apostle John, from
llev. xix. 11, to the end of the twentieth chapter, even the
judgment of all the dead may intervene. On this point we
affirm nothing. But we may perhaps safely affirm that with the
advent of the Son of Man in power and great glory, will com-
mence a new era of the Divine administration over man and
this earth, in which that great and glorious being will take an
open and direct control over this part of his dominions.
324 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
These observations, though proper for explanation, are aside
from our present purpose, which is to consider the structure of
the Lord's discourse, and the logical connection of its parts,
which we conceive to be in itself a matter of importance. We
proceed therefore to say, that if this be the just connection of
the discourse as recorded by Matthew, we may regard the
passage from Matt. xxiv. 32 to xxv. 30, inclusive, as paren-
thetical, or we may consider Matt. xxv. 31 — 46, as a resuming
of the prophetical discou;-se at xxiv. 31, which the Saviour
suspended at that verse for the purpose of giving some private
notes or tokens of warning, admonition, and exhortation, to hia
followers. It may be added that the passages in Mark xiii.
28 — 37, and Luke xxi. 28 — 36, are of this admonitory nature.
This period — that of the advent — we conceive, will be sepa-
rated from the preceding by an interval of some extent. This
opinion is founded upon the description our Lord himself gives
of the world at the time of his coming, in verses 37, 39, and
see Luke xvii. 26 — 30. Ignorant and regardless of the impend-
ing event, the masses of the nations will be in eager pursuit
of all the delights of this life, as they were in the days of
Noah; and Paul, writing by inspiration, 1 Thess. v. 2, 3,
describes the day of the Lord's coming as a time of supposed
peace and safety. Accordingly we understand the 29th and
30th verses of this chapter thus:
"Immediately after the tribulation of those days [that is,
immediately after the termination of that period, during which
the Jewish body politic, or state, is represented in the preceding
verse as a dead carcass preyed upon by vultures,] the sun shall
be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the
powers of the heaven shall be shaken : and then [that is next in
the order of these great steps in the march of Divine Providence
towards the consummation] shall appear the sign of the Son of
Man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth
mourn, and they shall see the Son of Man coming in the
clouds of heaven with power and great glory." Mark xiii. 24;
Luke xxi. 27.
We pause not to inquire what we are to understand by " the
sign of the Son of Man, in heaven," — an expression which
both Mark and Luke omit. At most we can only conjecture;
and it is sufficient for our present purpose to observe, that what-
ever that sign may be, it will not appear till after the distress
of the nations, and the interval of fancied peace and safety is
past; for it will be a sign of trouble, causing all the tribes of
the earth to mourn.
This consideration suggests that this advent of the Son of
Man, mentioned in Matt. xxv. 31, will be only for the
THE JUDGMENT OF THE NATIONS. 325
judgment of all the nations living on the earth at that time;
not including the generations of the dead. For observe, it is
in his Adamic character, or as the Son of Man, he sits upon
his throne and exercises judgment. In the preceding notes the
attention of the reader has been frequently called to the
different relations our Lord sustains to Israel, to the Church,
and to the world. See the notes on Matt. xii. 8, also see notes
on Matt. viii. 23—27, 28—32; ix. 2; xiv. 17; xvi. 13, 14,
27; xviii. 22, 23; xxii. 41 — 45. As Messiah, he has a king-
dom of kings and priests, — a multitude which no one can
number, collected out of all nations, and kindreds, and people,
and tongues. Rev. vi. 4 — 9. These he will glorify and exalt
to a parnership in his throne. Rev. iii. 21, and see notes on
Matt. xxi. 43 ; xxii. 14. It is to that small portion of this
immensely great and glorious body, who shall be living un-
glorified in the flesh at the end of this dispensation, that the
parable of the ten virgins. Matt. xxv. 1 — 12, is designed to be
applied. These were all given to him by covenant [Ttpo xara-
^olr^^ xoajaoo, Eph i. 4; 1 Pet. i. 20; and see John xvii. 24)
before the foundation of the world. In an especial sense they
are his purchased possession. Eph. i. 14. They constitute an
accession of accumulated glory to him, in compensation, so to
speak, for the immense cost of the Divine achievement of
redemption. Isa. liii. 11. Their inheritance is a co-heirship of
all things with Christ. 1 Cor. iii. 21, 23; Rev. xxi. 7; Rom.
viii. 17, 29, 30.
Different widely from these are those of the judged nations,
whom, at the day of his coming, he shall set at his right hand.
They are called to inherit a kingdom prepared for them in this
world {drro xaza^ohji; xoa/iou) from (not before) the foundation
thereof.*
These considerations might be enforced by others derived
from the expressed grounds of approval and reprobation. " I
was an hungered and ye gave me meat," etc., verse 35, "I was
an hungered and ye gave me no meat," etc., verse 42. It is a
* The attention of the critical reader is called to the distinction between
these two phrases, utto KaT«/3(iX«f Jt'jo-jucu, found in Matt. xiii. 35; xxv. 34; Luke
xi. 50; Heb. iv, 3; ix. 2G; Rev. xiii. 8; xvii. 8, and nfo x.at'J.^okh; k'. already dead, and calling to him the
John xix. 38. j centurion, he asked him if he had been
any while dead, and when he knew it of the centurion, Pilate
gave him leave, and commanded the body to be delivered to
Joseph."
This request was probably made very soon after the Saviour
expired, and Joseph, we may believe, being near the cross to
witness the event, hastened to Pilate as soon as it occurred.
His affection would prompt him to abridge, as much as possible,
the ignominious exposure of his beloved Master. The Jews
had requested of Pilate to order that the legs of all the
suiferers should be broken while they supposed that all were
alive, and Joseph, it is not improbable, made his request before
the soldiers could have had time to execute the command of
Pilate to hasten their death. For Pilate was evidently sur-
prised by the request of Joseph. He could not believe that
Jesus was so soon dead, nor did he believe it on Joseph's word.
We are told that persons who were crucified in the full vigour
of life and health, often hung suffering several days before
they expired. Hence it seemed incredible to him that a man
like our Lord, in the vigour of life, without blemish, Levit.
xxi. 16 — 23, and in perfect soundness, who had endured
scourging with such amazing fortitude, should have died so
quickly, contrary to his observation and experience. Accor-
dingly, he sent for the centurion who superintended the exe-
cution, and who probably remained at the place; for it was his
duty to remain there until the death of the sufferers, and
inquired of him whether the fact was so, before he assented to
the request of Joseph. It is apparent from the language of
Mark, that Pilate did not confine his inquiry to the fact
whether he was dead or not. It seemed so extraordinary that
he wished to know how long he had been dead — whether he
had been dead any considerable time. It may be, also, that
the earthquake had excited his fears still more than the
saying of the Jews, as to his superhuman character; and he
may have been desirous to know whether the death of Jesus
happened at the same time with the earthquake. But these
440 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
are mere surmises, although there can be no doubt that
Pilate must have been deeply impressed with the occurrences
of that day.
Plaving ascertained the fact, Pilate freely granted the re-
quest, and gave direction to the centurion to remove the body
and deliver it to Joseph. Mark's words {iocopr^aaro to ocofia
donavit) may be rendered, he made a present of the body to
Joseph, alluding probably to the common practice of Roman
governors, and, perhaps, to that of Pilate, on other occasions,
of demanding money for the privilege of removing a dead body
from the cross for burial. This is the more probable as Pilate
condemned him so unwillingly and against his own judgment.
It is not expressly said that the command to remove the body
was given to the centurion, yet as Pilate had acted through him,
and had just sent for him, it is not improbable that this
direction also was given to him. Matt, xxvii. 58. Nor do the
Evangelists inform us expressly who removed the body from
the cross. Luke xxiii. 53, seems to ascribe the act to Joseph,
though the centurion, acting by the command of Pilate, may
have taken part in it. We have seen how deeply this officer
was impressed by the scene of the crucifixion, and we can
imagine that his feelings were such as to prevent all rudeness
and violence in the performance of that duty. It was per-
formed probably while the two malefactors were still living,
and if so, in the presence at least of the centurion and
soldiers.
Here we may observe again how Divine Providence accom-
plishes its plans. It had been prophesied of the Messiah, Isa.
liii. 9, that he should be with the rich after his death, and
Joseph of Arimathea was emboldened by God's Spirit, contrary
to his former conduct, to appear before Pilate with his unusual
request. It was necessary, too, that the dead body of the
Lord should be cared for, so as to prevent further violence to
the frame, and the centurion had been prepared, by the solemn
scene he had witnessed, for that purpose.
Matt, xxvii. 59. "I "And when Joseph had taken the
John xix. 39, 40. J body, there came also Nicodemus, which
at the first came to Jesus by night, and brought a mixture of
myrrh and aloes, about a hundred pound weight."
It does not appear that there was or had been before this
any concert between these two persons. Had there been, it is
presumable that both would have gone to Pilate together and
joined in the request. It appears too, that the body, after it
had been taken from the cross, was delivered to Joseph, and
not till then did Nicodemus appear. This man had early made
the acquaintance of the Lord Jesus, even before he entered
THE BURIAL OF JESUS. 441
upon his public ministry, John iii. 1, and was from the begin-
ning deeply impressed with his miracles. He was a Pharisee
and a ruler — or as our Lord addressed him, a master of Israel,
John iii. 10 ; and, if we may judge from the quantity of the
precious mixture he brought, was also rich. The aloes, we are
told, was a production of India and Arabia, and its odour very
pleasant. It was pulverized and mixed with the myrrh, which
was a fluid. It had been prepared to anoint the body of the
Lord, so as to repel the attacks of worms, and to preserve it
against decomposition. Three or four pounds of the mixture
would have sufficed for this purpose, but Nicodemus, in the
fulness of his affection, had prepared about a hundred pounds'
weight. It is evident these disciples did not know that their
beloved Lord was so soon to rise from the dead. It Avas not
till after the event they understood these words of the Psalmist,
Ps. xvi. 10, "Thou wilt not leave my soul in Hades, (Sheol,)
neither wilt thou suffer thy Holy One to see corruption." Acts
ii. 27.* Yet was it a labour of love, which, like Mary's, John
xii. 3 — 7, their Lord would not suffer to pass without its reward.
Matt. X. 42.
John xix. 40. \ "Then they took the body of Jesus,
Matt, xxvii. 59. j and wrapped it in a clean linen cloth
with the spices, as the manner of the Jews is to bury."
This allusion of the Evangelist John to the Jewish manner of
burial shows that he wrote this Gospel for the use of persons
not acquainted with Jewish customs. But why, we mo.y in-
quire, did not these rich men provide some more precious mate-
rial than linen to wrap the body in ; especially as Nicodemus
had made so costly a provision of spices? We are told, and
this is a sufficient answer to the question, that it was not lawful
to use a more precious or costly material for the purpose of
burial than linen. They might not use silk or gorgeous gar-
ments for the burial even of a prince.
As the Sabbath was near, it is supposed that this whole pro-
ceeding was conducted in haste, and that the body was removed
to the sepulchre immediately after it was taken from the cross,
and after that was wrapped in the linen with the spices. Luke
informs us, xxiii. 55, 56, that the women who followed him from
Galilee beheld the sepulchre, and how his body was laid, and
after that they returned and prepared spices and ointments for
the same purpose, intending to use them after the Sabbath was
over. The Jewish method of burial was a kind of embalming,
* The Hebrew word Sheol signifies grave. Gen. xlii. 38 ; 1 Kings ii. 6 — 9.
The words mi/ soul in the Hebrew idiom signify me or my person; so that the
sense of the Psalmist is, " Thou wilt not abandon ??!e to the grave," i. e. to the
power of the grave, "that it may detain me as its own." See Byihner's Lyra.
56
442 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
and similar to tlie Egyptian method. The linen was made into
strips, or bandages, then covered with myrrh and spices, and
wound round the body after it had been washed. Herodotus,
book ii. ; Tacitus Hist, book v. chap. 5. After involving the
whole body, without eviscerating it, in such bandages, it was
the custom of the Jews to bind the head about with a napkin,
as we learn from the account John gives of the resurrection of
Lazarus. John xi. 44.
In this manner these two rich disciples performed this office
of affection to the deceased body of their Master. The whole,
it is probable, was completed before they departed from the
sepulchre ; but the pious women who remained only till they
saw the body conveyed into the sepulchre, made preparation to
perform the same office, not knowing what Joseph and Nicode-
mus did after they departed.
John xix. 41, 42. "Now in the place where he was cruci-
fied there was a garden, and in the garden a new sepulchre,
which he [Joseph — Matt, xxvii. 60] had hewn out of a rock,_
wherein was never a man yet laid. There laid they Jesus
therefore, because of the Jews' preparation day [Luke xxiii. 54,]
for that day Avas the preparation, and the Sabbath drew on,
[John xix. 42,] for the sepulchre was nigh at hand."
The motive ascribed to these attached disciples for selecting
this place of burial was its proximity to the place of crucifixion.
The Sabbath, which would have been violated by the interment
of a dead body, was so near, that no other place, perhaps, at
that late hour, could have been provided. It seemed suitable,
also, for the purpose. It was new, and had never been used as
a place of interment. It belonged to Joseph, and he had the
right to appropriate it to that use ; and although designed pro-
bably for himself and his family, he could readily yield it up as
a tribute of his affection. Observe, too, that it was a place of
security; having been hewn from a rock, so that the body could
not have been abstracted from its resting-place, except through
the entrance or door. As no dead body had been deposited
there before, there coukl be no ground to ascribe the resurrec-
tion to any other person ; nor could the resurrection of the body
of the Lord Jesus be ascribed to its contact Avith the bones of a
prophet, of which the Old Testament furnishes an example,
2 Kings xiii. 21, in the case of Elisha. Thus while we may
allow scope for the exercise of human motives, there was an
overruling Providence in the selection of this place, in order to
provide the strongest evidence possible of the fact of the resur-
rection of the identical body of the Lord Jesus. This will
further appear by the precaution these disciples were influenced
THE BURIAL OF JESUS. 443
to take to secure the entrance into the sepulchre, for after de-
positing the body they —
Matt, xxvii. 60. "Rolled a great stone against the door
of the sepulchre, and then departed."
But this was not sufficient to answer the Providential design;
for a stone, that two men coiild roll to the door, two other men
might remove from its place. We shall therefore see presently
that the enemies of the Lord were moved to take the matter
into their own hands, and not only to seal the stone, but station
a military guard to prevent its removal.
Matt, xxvii. 61. "l " And there was Mary Magdalene,
Mark XV. 47. > and the other Mary, [called by Mark,
Luke xxiii. 55, 56. j Mary the mother of Joses,] sitting over
against the sepulchre, and beheld where he was laid. And the
women which came with him from Galilee, beheld the sepulchre
and how the body was laid; and they returned and prepared
spices and ointments, and rested the Sabbath day, according to
the commandment."
There does not appear to have been any concert between
these women and Joseph and Nicodemus. They, perhaps, were
watching from a little distance, not venturing at first to come
near. As Joseph and Nicodemus were secret disciples, it is
quite possible the women had no acquaintance with them, and
even did not know their purpose. It is not probable they re-
mained as long as the two disciples. For those spoken of by
Luke returned in time to prepare spices and ointments before
sunset, when the Sabbath commenced, which perhaps they would
not have done had they known of the large provision Nicodemus
had made, and the use he had made of it. Neither did
Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of James and Salome
know what Nicodemus had done ; for they also bought sweet
spices and came to the sepulchre after the Sabbath to anoint
the body. Mark xvi. 1. Observe, too, how punctually these
females observed the law of the Sabbath. Great as their affec-
tion was for Jesus, and Divine as they believed him to be, they
did not feel themselves free to perform this act of affection as
an act of necessity or mercy on the Sabbath. How painfully
does the irreverence of many professed Christians contrast with
the conduct of these Jewish disciples !
Matt, xxvii. 62 — 6Q. " Now the next day that followed the
day of the preparation, the chief priests and Pharisees came
together unto Pilate, saying, Sir, we remember that that de-
ceiver said, while he was yet alive, After three days I will rise
again. Command, therefore, that the sepulchre be made sure
until the third day, lest his disciples come by night and steal him
away, and say unto the people, He is risen from the dead: so
444 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
the last error shall be worse than the first. Pilate said unto
them, Ye have a watch : go your way, make it as sure as you
can. So they went and made the sepulchre sure, sealing the
stone, and setting a watch."*
These circumstances are recorded only by Matthew. His
phraseology to denote the time of the occurrence is peculiar.
He does not say, On the Sabbath ; although that was the day
which followed the preparation. Various conjectures have been
made to account for the periphrasis; the most probable of
which is that the Evangelist chose to tax the chief priests and
Pharisees obliquely or inferentially, rather than directly and
bluntly, with a breach of the Sabbath, by the zeal they mani-
fested in this matter. It is not probable that any considerable
body of persons waited upon Pilate on the Sabbath. Perhaps
their call was rather informal than official. Their motive may
have been to induce Pilate to act in the matter rather than
leave it to them, as they could not attend to it without violating
their Sabbath, by setting a watch and making the sepulchre
sure. However this may be, the fact shows a breach of their
own law of the Sabbath,t which they would have censured in
any other person. But their bitter enmity to the Lord Jesus,
and their purpose to omit no means of extirpating his influence,
made them disregard all other considerations — whether divine
or human. If they expected, however, that Pilate would be
condescending enough to relieve them of the care of securing
the sepulchre, they were disappointed. His reply in effect Avas,
"Why do you trouble me with this business? You have a mili-
tary force at your command. Do it yourselves in your own
* MsTst Tfiii ijuijiA; is the same as h tx Tpnn >)//£/3« or Jw Tpim >)//f/)a)v. It means
"within three days," or "on the third day." This sense the language yields,
and the connection requires. Msra is used in this sense in Biblical Greek,
Deut. xxxi. 10. So likewise in classical Greek, //e9' ifAipAv (interdiu) in the day-
time— //e9' ijuiji^i; iTrru., "within seven days." In this sense the Jewish rulers
understood the phrase, because they wished a watch placed vmncdiatehj, and to
be continued "scoc tdc Tfim ti/jLi^^^," until the third day. They did not under-
stand the saying of Jesus to mean, that after three full days (that is, on the
fourth day) he would rise, but that he would arise on the third day. The pre-
diction, therefore, would be fulfilled if he rose at the first moment of the third
day from his death.
f It should be observed, however, that the 66th verse may mean no more
than that the priests and Pharisees caiwec? these things to be done by others;
not that they did them with their own hands. If so, then, according to the
casuistry of the Rabbins, it was no breach of the Sabbath — for Moses forbade
only bodily labour, such as gathering wood, lighting fires, &c. They might go,
therefore, lawfully to Pilate and ask him to give them a watch, and to seal the
sepulchre; and -having received authority to do so, even cause these acts to be
done on the Sabbath by others, without violating the fourth commandment as
they explained it. Yet they did not so expound the law when our Lord cured
the infirm man at the pool of Bethesda. John v. 11, 13, (see ix. 6, 7, 14, 16;)
Luke vi. 7, 11.
THE SEPULCHRE MADE SURE. 445
way. As for any scruples of conscience upon the obligation of
your Sabbath, you seem to have overcome them by calling on
me for such a purpose. You can attend to this matter as con-
sistently with your law as you can come to the Prretorium on
your Sabbath to transact secular business with me." Perhaps
Pilate remembered how, the day before, they had refused to
come into the Prsetorium lest they should be defiled.
It appears also by this passage, not only that our Lord had
predicted his resurrection after three days, but that the priests
were fully aware of the fact. Yet it appears by other places,
that even his disciples did not really expect that he would rise
from the dead, and were, in fact, as skeptical in this matter as
the priests. Indeed, the preparation of the myrrh, aloes, spices,
and ointments, of the linen, and the manner in which the body
was wrapped up, all indicate the full persuasion of a long con-
tinuance in the grave. "They believed not," as Lightfoot re-
marks, "that he should die, till he was dead; nor believed that
he should rise again, no, not when he was already arisen."
Matt, xxvii. 6i3. " So they went and made the sepulchre
sure, sealing the stone and setting a Avatch."
This precaution was of a nature not to be postponed, accord-
ing to their view of the case. Of course, they did these things
on their Sabbath, but whether after sunset on Friday, or on the
morning of Saturday, according to our mode of reckoning, we
are not expressly informed. The watch they set was taken
from the soldiers attached to the temple who were subject to
the orders of the priests. Some have supposed that the stone
was sealed with Pilate's signet; but this is not recorded, Y'et
whether so or not, the end of Divine Providence was secured,
by providing such means to secure the body of our blessed
Lord within the sepulchre, as could not be eluded or overcome.
Thus the evidence of his resurrection by Divine power Avas
placed beyond all question or doubt, and an argument was
put into the mouth of his followers which could not be gain-
said or resisted.
It was probably the intention of the priests and rulers to
remove the body from the sepulchre after three days, and pub-
licly expose it to the gaze of the people, so that by the antici-
pated failure of this prediction, his credit with them would be
destroyed. Undoubtedly, if the prediction had been falsified
by the event, they would have done so. Their difficulty in that
case Avould have been to prove the prediction, for he made it
plainly to none but to his disciples in private, and only obscurely
to others in public, to the people. Markviii. 31; xiv. 58; Matt,
xvi, 21; John ii. 19; Matt. xii. 40. How the priests came
to understand his public allusions so well, we can only con-
446 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
jecture. Perhaps their intercourse with the traitor Judas was
the source of their knowledge. However this may be, the
result was, our Lord's body was kept safely in the sepulchre of
Joseph under the threefold guard of the stone, the seal, and the
watch.
CHAPTER XII.
THE RESURRECTION.
A harmony of the chapters to be considered. — The whole doctrine of the glorified
Church inseparably connected with the doctrine of our Lord's resurrection. —
The Marys at the sepulchre. — Intercourse between angels, the Saviour, and
his disciples — Ministry of angels in the present dispensation. — Spiritual
natures. — Mary's recognition of her Lord through his power over her mind
and spirit. — Christ's prohibition of Mary's touch explained. — Jesus in his
future interviews with his disciples no longer to be considered as an inhabi-
tant of the earth. — Christ's risen body not confined to the earth during the
forty days. — Inadequate conception of the attributes with which our Lord
investe2n ^^^7 remarkably signifies hereafter in
respect of time, and from above in respect of place.] Hence St. Paul, com-
bining both senses, says the second man is the Lord from heaven. 1 Cor. xv.
45. " Adam is the figure of him that was to come." (tou /ufKKovrog — Rom. v.
14; rather say, of the coming one, tow ip^c/utvou, that is, the future Adam.)
Bishop Horsley renders the verse thus: "And thou hast regarded me
(David) in the ari-angement about the man that is to be from above," &c. —
that is, in foi-ming the scheme of incarnation, regard was had to the honour of
David and his house, as a secondary object, by making it a part of the plan
that Messiah should be born in his family. The sense of 2 Sam. vii. 19 is the
same, though the phraseology differs somewhat. This remark of Bishop
Horsley was intended to apply to the incarnation of Messiah in the womb of
the virgin. The second incarnation, in the sepulchre of Joseph, had respect
to much higher objects than the honour of David, if the observations before
made upon John xix. 26, 27, are well founded. See vol. ix. 645, 046. The
view here taken of the resurrection of the Lord, it is submitted, confirms the
view taken of the passage in John xix. last cited.
456 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
perfectly formed and prepared, though by the process of natu-
ral growth, ready to be occupied by the spiritual and Divine
nature of Jehovah Jesus. It was the same great Being who
gave animation and life to both these bodies, but in different
degrees and for vastly different ends. To the full-formed body
of the first Adam the Lord Christ, as Creator, imparted the
breath of life, and made him a living soul. Gen. ii. 7 ; 1 Cor.
XV. 45. The other body he himself, as the creative, quickening
spirit, entered and occupied, that through it and the Church,
which is his mystical body, he might for ever make manifest to
his intelligent creatures the Divine nature and glory.
But not to insist on these passages, which are adverted to in
this place rather for the analogies they suggest than as the
most obvious proofs of our proposition, it is sufficient to say,
that the whole doctrine of the glorified Church is inseparably
connected with our Lord's resurrection. See Col. iii. 3. With-
out it the gospel is an idle tale, and the preachers of it false
witnesses before God.
The resurrection of Christ, which we proceed now to consider,
is a question of fact, to be decided by testimony, and so the
Scriptures represent it. Acts i. 22; ii. 32; iii. 15; iv. 33;
V. 32; vii, 56; x. 41, 42; 1 Cor. xv. 15. Being the corner-
stone of the Christian's hope it has been fiercely assailed. It
is not our purpose to consider this testimony except so far as it
falls in with the due exposition of the evangelic narrative to
do so. Those who desire a full discussion of this whole subject
may be referred to the elaborate discourse of Humphrey Ditton
concerning the resurrection of Christ, or the less extensive,
though learned and convincing work of Gilbert West, upon the
same subject. We return now to the narrative:
Matt, xxviir. 1. "In the end of the Sabbath* as it began
* 'O^s ii a-^^^^Toov, after the Sabbath was ended, peracto sahbaio. Figura-
tively the word siguifies a week; because each week ended with the Sabbath.
The Evangelists use different expressions to' denote the time when the women
first came to the sepulchre. Matthew says it was t» i7n<^m(j-x.oij(n, viz., tifxifA or
(CD. These words may signify in the morning twilight or at the near approach of
day, as appears by the use of the word by Luke xxiii. 54, where he applies it
to the approach of the Sabbath, which began at sunset, and of course with the
darkening rather than the lighting up of the sky. Mark denotes the time by
the words kiolv Trpiei, very early. Yet he adds the words dvctTaAstvToc toi/ ixiov,
which create a dilficulty. But the participle is in the first aorist, and may be
translated orituro sole, see Erasiuus^s Annotations, or cum sol oriri inciperet, when
the sun was beginning to rise ; or at the first sign of the approach of the sun.
Luke's expression is cpSpou ^u6io; (siihaiidi ovtoc-) The word of6/!ic denotes in pure
Greek the whole of the morning twilight, from the first and faintest glimmer-
ing of it, until sunrise. Of course i^S^o? /SsSuc signifies the early dawn in con-
tradistinction to cfidfuQ s£r;t='Toc. If we feel a difficulty in apprehending the pre-
cise meaning of this expression, it will be removed by an actual observation of
the approach of the morning light upon a cloudless sky. At first a mere
THE WOMEN AT THE SEPULCHRE. 457
to dawn towards the first day of the week, came Mary Mag-
dalen and the other Mary to see the sepulchre."
The other Mary here spoken of was Mary the mother of
James and Joses, who sat over against the sepulchre when
Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus closed it with a great
stone. Matt, xxvii. 56, 61; Mark xv. 47. John mentions only
Mary Magdalen, hut an expression occurs in her communica-
tion to Peter and John, from which we may infer that she went
not alone. "They have taken away the Lord and [ocoajusu)
we hnoiv not where they have laid him." *
Mark seems to say that Salome also accompanied Mary Mag-
dalen, Perhaps she did, although some commentators think
otherwise. t The question is not important. There can be little
glimmering of grey light appears in the East. This the Greeks called c^S/ssc
Thucydides (3: 112, 4, 110) has a^x cpSpai, on the first dawn. This first feeble
beginning of light gradually increases; the sky becomes brighter and brighter
until it is changed into the redness of flame, and presently the sun itself
appears, o (ixioc dvaTsxxa. John denotes the time of Mary Magdalen's arrival by
the words a-nortm in cvn;, while it was yet dark. He does not say vmrcg 'nt
oliftai;) you (not auzoui;, them) into
Galilee. There shall ye see [oi^'eode) him : Lo, I have told
((3/^^v) you."
These allusions of the angel to the promises made by the
Saviour in his private intercourse with his disciples. Matt. xxvi.
32 ; Mark xiv. 28, and to the peculiar sin of Peter, give us a
glimpse of the intercourse between angels and the Saviour and
his disciples. Though unseen by mortal eye, they were privi-
leged to follow in his train, witness his trials and sufferings,
hear his words, and study in him, as we may believe, the deep
mysteries of God in the work of redemption. 1 Pet. i. 12 ;
1 Cor. iv. 9; Matt. iv. 11; xxvi. 53; Heb. i. 14.
Matt, xxviii. 8. " And going out quickly, [k^sldouaae rayo,
that is from the sepulchre in which they were,] they ran from
the sepulchre with fear and great joy to bring the disciples
word."f
Mark's language is more forcible than Matthew's. And going
* Mark xvi. 7, as translated in the E. V., seems inconsistent with this expla-
nation. But the punctuation of the original text is faulty. We should put a
period after Peter, and make the rest of the verse a distinct sentence. "Go
tell his disciples and Peter." What ? That he is risen, that he is not here.
In other woi'ds, " Go tell his disciples and Peter what I have just told you.
The particle oti like the Hebrew h^ is asseverative, or pleonastic, as it often is,
e.g. in John vii. 12. Why should the angel charge the women to tell the dis-
ciples and Pefer that Jesus would go before them {viz. the women addressed
uy-sLi;) into Galilee ?
f To get this sense we put a comma after 'ra.^u, and another after eJ/ja^ov, and
strike out the comma after /xtyahni.
THE FLIGHT OF THE WOMEN FKOM THE SEPULCHRE. 463
out quickly, they fled from the sepulchre. For {rpofioz) trem-
bling and (ixavaac^:) amazement (sf;^^) had seized them; neither
said they anything to any one, i. e. while they were fleeing from
the sepulchre towards the place from which they had come, for
they were afraid.
This picture is drawn from life. The narrative bears internal
marks of its truthfulness. How natural is Matthew's expres-
sion!— "fear and great joy." How contrary was this news to
their expectation ! They had come to the sepulchre to see it,
and to weep there. They had brought sweet spices to anoint
his dead body. Could anything be more contrary to their
expectation than what they saw and heard ? The sepulchre
open — an angel its only occupant — no dead body there — the
linen clothes lying — the napkin in a place by itself — and the
explicit announcement of the angel. A strong ray of hope sud-
denly falls on their hearts. And yet possibly the angelic form
they seemed to see, and the words they seemed to hear, might
be unreal, or in some way deceptive. Hence the mixture of
emotions. Besides, the unwonted sight and voice of the angel
would naturally excite the strong emotions Mark describes, and
perhaps even restrain for a time the inclination, if not the
power, to speak. Then again, their hasty exit from the sepul-
chre, their speed, and all of them under the influence of common
emotions. Certainly unlearned, unpractised writers, such a3
Matthew and Mark were, could never have invented a tale so
true to nature — so life-like. These women having thus fled,
and the angel perhaps having disappeared, the sepulchre was
again solitary. But soon, probably very soon, another party of
women arrived, whose visit is described only by Luke. They
were the Galilean women of whom he speaks in chap, xxiii.
55, 56. These by themselves were a large company, but their
number was increased by others who joined them. Luke
xxiv. 1 — 3. " These came at early dawn, bringing the spices
they had prepared (before the Sabbath,) and found the stone*
rolled away from the sepulchre, and entering, they found not
the body of the Lord Jesus."
Several circumstances prove conclusively that this was a dif-
ferent party from that mentioned by Matthew and Mark. To
this party two angels appeared, whom Luke describes as men
* Tov x/Sov, that stone, [Ifia-TiKoii,) viz. that stone which Joseph of Ariniathea
and Nicodemus had put there, and which the priests and Pharisees had caused
to be sealed. Yet Luke had not mentioned anything about this stone before.
He took it for granted, his reader wouhl readily supply this and other circum-
stances which were generally known. None of the Evangelists wrote as phi-
hjsopbers or orators write, but as men without culture, content to employ the
language of common life. Luke is not an exception to this remark.
464 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
in shining garments. They appeared in the posture of stand-
ing.* The address of the angels was different, nor did they
charge the women with any message to the disciples. The ap-
pearance of the angels, though it impressed the women with
reverential fear, so that they inclined their faces toward the
earth, yet had no overpowering effect. They are not repre-
sented as fleeing hastily from the sepulchre, or as speechless
through fear. Two objections are sometimes made to this
view.
1. It is said that Luke himself mentions (in verse 10) Mary
Magdalen, and Joanna, and Mary the mother of James, and
[at locTial) the rest with them ; and hence it is inferred these
were the women intended in the first verse. But if such were
his meaning, why did he not say, verse 10, It was Mary Mag-
dalen, and Joanna, and Mary the mother of James, and the
rest with them, who went {oftdpou [-iadeot:) very early to the
sepulchre, bearing the spices they had prepared? And why
did he say in the ninth verse, that these women, whose visit to
the sepulchre he had described, told all these things to the
eleven, and to the rest, and in the very next verse repeat that
Mary Magdalen, and Joanna, and the other Mary told these
things also to the apostles, if they were both but one and the
same party ? The repetition on this view would be quite use-
less.
What the Evangelist intends may be thus stated. In the
9th verse he says, these women from Galilee, of whom he had
just spoken, returned from the sepulchre, and told the eleven
what they had seen. But there were certain other females,
namely, the Magdalen Mary, and Joanna, and Mary the
mother of James, and the other women [at Ioitmi) of their
party, who had already been to the apostles before, and had
told them these things. If this is not the true explanation,
we can perceive no reason for repeating in the lOth verse what
had already been stated in the 9th verse.
2. Another objection is, the phrase by which Luke de-
notes the time when these women arrived at the sepulchre,
as being at the very earliest dawn — at the first twinkhng of
gray light, and of course while it was yet dark. In this assump-
tion we apprehend lies a mistake, and the one which has created
the greatest difficulty in harmonizing this part of the Evange-
lists. Luke uses, as we have seen, a word {ofidpo^) which denotes
the whole period of dawning fr.om its earliest appearance till
* Gilbert Wakefield says (sTecrTucrav) stood in this place means no more than
((iu-av) were. The remark maj' be criticallj just, but we think the Evangelist
means to express joos^Mre.
THE ADDRESS OF THE ANGELS. 465
sunrise. To this he adds the qualifying word {^ado^) deep;
which, while it puts a negative upon the supposition that it was
the appearance of the first and faintest ray of light, intimates
that it was still early; Avhen the dawn was somewhat, though
not far advanced.* Whatever difficulty there may be in ad-
mitting this sense of the expression, there is much more in
harmonizing on this assumption the other particulars of the
two narratives, and certainly it is more reasonable to allow
some latitude to a general expression of time, such as Luke's
is, than to add to or take from the material circumstances in
the narrative of either of the Evangelists. Before we leave
this passage, we should briefly notice the address of these
angels.
Luke xxrv. 5, 6, 7. "Why seek ye the living among the
dead? He is not here, but is risen. Remember how he spake
unto you when he was yet in Galilee, saying, The Son of Man
must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified,
and the third day rise again."
The force of the original is weakened in this translation.
"Why seek ye the living one — the ever-living Jehovah Jesus —
among dead mortals?" The expression reminds us of Rev. i.
17, 18: "I am the first and the last, the living one: I was
dead, but behold I live for evermore." See John xiv. 6; v. 26.
Here, as before, we observe the only proof the angels appeal to
is his own word: "Recollect that while yet in Galilee he
spake to you [of this very event], saying, It behooveth the Son
of Man to be delivered," &c. How familiarly these holy beings
refer to a special communication the Saviour, foreseeing this
very visit to the sepulchre, had ^made to these devoted females,
when perhaps none of his male disciples were present. They
do not speak as though they were delivering a message with
which they had been charged, but as of their own motion,
* 'A/xa ofbfai may signify at the very first appearance of dawn. Tiifi o/!6gov
means about the dawn of day ; it may be a little before or a little after tue
first appearance of light. 'OpSpic jS»6uj denotes a time when the dawning is
still deep ; that is, not far advanced, though not the very first appearance of
light. As when we say early spring, we do not mean the very first moment of
spring, but an early portion of that season ; so by early dawn we do not mean
the very first instant of the dawn, but the first part of that period. See a note
of the Rev. S. T. Bloomfield on Thucyd., book III. § 112, where he endeavours
to show that hfkfw 0u.(l(o? — Ai and a-KOTictc trt ouan;, all refer to the same
time, which he expresses by the phrases "peep of day," "the gray dawn."
He cites most, if not all the places from classic authors in which the expression
occurs, and comes to his conclusion with some difiidence. Had he not sup-
posed that the three Evangelists refer to the same party of women, his conclu-
sion from his authorities would probably have been different. It is believed
that the word ji^Quc, in the comparative or superlative degree, docs not occur
in connection with ipSpsc, and the reason is, that its use in the positive degree
is to denote time by comparison.
59
466 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE,
reminding them only of what they already knew, and could not
have forgotten, yet did not believe, as the spices they had pre-
pared and brought with them proved. We may regard this
address as a reproof of their unbelief, and its purport may be
thus expressed: ""You ought not to be surprised at any of
these events which afflict you so much. While yet in Galilee,
the Lord told you plainly what would befall him on this visit
to Jerusalem. He told you very expressly, too, that on this
very day he would rise from the dead. How faithless and slow
of heart you are to believe his plainest words!"
We have no means of determining how long this company of
women remained at the place. They appear to have entered
the sepulchre immediately upon their arrival. If the dawn had
then so far advanced that they could clearly distinguish the
various objects about them, they must have seen what Peter
and John saw a short time afterwards. On any supposition,
they saw enough to perplex them greatly. At this juncture
the angels appeared, and explained the cause of what they saw,
but could not understand.
The first company of women departed quickly from the
sepulchre, in great fear, by the express command of the angel.
Matt, xxviii. 8; Mark xvi. 8. The second company were too
much impressed by the unlooked-for appearance of the angels
and their address to linger in their presence. There was
probably a design in these arrangements, bringing first one
company and then another, and quickly despatching them
to make way for a third. Thus proofs were multiplied, and the
news was quickly and widely spread. However this may be,
when Peter and John arrived, which could not have been long
afterwards, they saw no person near.
While these things were occurring, Mary Magdalen found
Peter and John, and told them how she went to the sepulchre,
aud what were her fears: "They have taken away the Lord
out of the sepulchre, and we know not where they have laid
him." What she feared, she afiirmed as a fact, but without
evidence. It was her too hasty conclusion from her finding the
sepulchre open. It is probable she stated both the fact of the
open sepulchre and her conclusion from it.
John xx. 3, 4. "Peter therefore {i^rpSev) went forth, and
that other disciple, and came to the sepulchre, and they ran
both together; and that other disciple did outrun Peter, and
came first to the sepulchre."
The impression Mary's communication made on the minds of
these disciples may be gathered from these verses. They
r(garded it as very extraordinary. It impressed them very
deeply. Had she told them she found the sepulchre closed
PETER AND JOHN AT THE SEPULCHRE. 467
■vritli the stone, and surrounded with a military guard, it would
have been just what they expected, and probably they would
have remained unmoved where they were. But who could
have removed the stone and conveyed away the body? To
what place had it been taken ? And what motive could any
have for such a desecration, especially at that time? By what
means, if any, could they recover the body, that they might
bury it elsewhere, beyond the reach of malice? These, or such
as these, were probably the questions which occupied their
hearts and thoughts.
John xx. 5. "And he, stooping down, saw the linen clothes
lying, yet went he not in."
John was eager to see what could be seen, but his timidity of
character prevented him from actually entering. Howstrano-e!
This disciple, who feared not to stand at the foot of the cross
during the fearful scene of the crucifixion, had not the courage
to enter the sepulchre alone !
John xx. 6, 7. " Then cometh Simon Peter, folioAving
him, and went into the sepulchre, and seeth the linen clothes
lie, and the napkin that was about his head not lying with the
linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself."
We are struck with the particularity of the narrative,
and its perfect consistency with the known characters of
these apostles. Peter, upon reaching the sepulchre, did not
pause an instant. He entered it to ascertain with certainty
the minutest facts of the case. How consistent this with
his ardent, decided character ! John, emboldened by Peter's
example,
John XX. 8. "Then went in also, and he saw and be-
lieved"—
What? He saw what Peter had seen, viz. the condition of
the sepulchre and of the linen clothes and napkin, and believed
what Mary Magdalen had told him. To this interpretation it
is objected that he might have believed thus much without
entering the sepulchre. Hence it is inferred by some that he
believed something more and greater. The particulars he
records about the clothes and the napkin, and the manner in
which they were laid, are mentioned as the ground of the
conclusion he had formed, and which he expresses by the word
{imareuazv) believed — a word which is commonly used in a
religious sense in this gospel, iii. 15; x. 26; xix. 35. There
is force in these considerations. It is to be observed that John
here speaks for himself only. He does not say anything about
Peter's reasonings or conclusions, nor does he say that either
communicated his reflections to the other ; but he adds, that
both he and Peter
468 NOTES ON SCRIPTUKE.
John xx. 9. " Until that time (oudsTno) had not understood
oux fjoscaap) the Scripture that he must rise from the dead."
His meaning, therefore, may be, that reasoning from these
facts, and recalling our Lord's repeated declaration, that he
should rise from the dead on the third day, light began to break
upon his mind, and he soon came to the true conclusion, while
Peter may have remained ignorant of the true solution until the
Lord actually appeared to him. These disciples, being left to
their own conjectures, may have reasoned differently. No inter-
preting angel appeared to them, and the thought of his resur-
rection might occur to one and not to the other as a possible
solution of the strange occurrence. While they lingered about
the solitary spot, Mary Magdalen returned, but whether any
inquiries or communications passed between her and them we
are not informed. Not a word is recorded as having been
uttered by either Peter or John while they were there. All we
knovr is, that having seen what they could,
John xx. 10, 12. "They went away again to their
respective homes, while Mary stood without at the sepulchre
weeping ; and as she wept, she stooped down and looked into
the sepulchre, and seeth two angels in white sitting, the one at
the head and the other at the feet where the body of Jesus had
lain."
It was the strong affection and deep sorrow of Mary which
detained her thus alone at the sepulchre. Yet she did not ven-
ture to enter it, as Peter and John had done. Perhaps she
designed to do so,* and would have done so, had she not when
stooping down discovered the angels within, whom she took to
be men.
Do we inquire whether these angels were in the sepulchre
while Peter and John were there, unperceived? Or did they
enter it after these disciples had departed, without being seen
by Mary? Were they the same angels that had appeared be-
fore, or others? These questions we cannot answer; yet we
may learn from the narrative, however explained, something of
the extraordinary powers with which these holy beings are
gifted, and how they can minister unseen to the heirs of salva-
tion while yet on the earth.
We do not reflect as we ought what numbers of them may
move daily in the paths of human activity, wholly unperceived
by us, or, if perceived, regarded as these were by Mary. 1 Cor.
iv. 9; Heb. xiii. 2; Luke xv. 10; Matt, xviii. 10; Rom. viii. 38 ;
* The words TretpMu-^tv tU to (^vh/uuoi may signify, she stooped towards the sepul-
chre to enter into it. The words and looked in our translation, are not in the
original.
MARY MAGDALEN WEEPING AT THE SEPULCHRE. 469
1 Tim. V. 21." During the present dispensation, we are clearly
taught, they fulfil a most important ministry, Ileb. i. 14, -which
in the world to come will be supplied by the glorified saints,
whose service may then be performed for the most part as un-
perceived as the ministry of the angels is now. Ileb. ii. 5 ;
Luke XX. 36; Rev. v. 10.
John xx. 13. "They say unto her, Woman, why weepest
thou?"
Why should they ask such a question? Did they not know
why she wept? Did they purpose to reply to her, but were
prevented by the unexpected appearance of the Lord himself?
Or were they conscious of his presence before? Or was their
question designed merely to soften her surprise, or to invest the
occurrence with the appearance of human life? Or do angels
sympathize in the sorrows of God's people, and administer con-
solation by silent suggestion, and, when permitted, by audible
speech ?
John xx. 13. "She saith unto them. Because they have
taken away my Lord, and I know not where they have laid
him."*
This answer shows how ignorant this devoted disciple was of
her Lord's exalted character, and of the real object and end of
his ministry. It shows us too, how completely his Divine nature
was concealed in his human, or, perhaps we should say, how
truly and perfectly he was a man. Mary thought of him only
as a deceased human friend, whose lifeless, helpless corpse had
been removed from its resting-place by rude hands — perhaps by
his enemies. In the fulness of her heart she had come early to
the sepulchre to embalm his beloved remains, and preserve them
from early corruption. Her grief was that she was deprived
of this mournful service. Had she thought of his resurrection
to life, could she have wept? Could she have inquired about
where his body was concealed ? How improbable it is, then,
that Mary, and all those who shared in her disappointment,
Luke xxiv. 21, could have agreed together to circulate a report
of his resurrection ! Matt, xxvii. 64. We observe that Mary
replies to the inquiry of the angels with composure; at least
without fear of them. She supposed them, in fact, to be men,
not reflecting that they could not have entered the sepulchre if
they were such, without her knowledge.
But the women to whom the angels appeared before, were
very differently impressed; they made no reply, but fled
aS"righted and speechless from the place. Matt, xxviii. 5, 8;
* A writer remarks, " Perhaps she surmised that they had done the act, but
did not like to tax them with it."
470 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
Mark xvi. 6 — 8. Wlij this difference? We suppose it was
because the Lord designed to show himself to this disciple, and
make her the first human witness of his resurrection. Another
reason may be found, perhaps, in the typical office which Mary
fulfilled at that time, which will be explained hereafter. For
these purposes it was necessary that her mind should not be
discomposed by fear, or by any such strong emotions as would
disqualify her for tranquil and exact observation.
John xx. 14. "And when she had thus said, she turned
herself back, and saw Jesus standing, and knew not that it was
Jesus."
Naturally would Mary withdraw from the sepulchre on seeing
two men within it. If her purpose was, when she stooped, to
enter it, she would postpone it until the men, as she took them
to be, had withdrawn. She turned, perhaps with the intention
of retiring, till they should withdraw, to some place out of
view. Some commentators understand the words {iazpaipri zlci
za OTicaco) of the Evangelist as signifying that she left the
sepulchre, and was on her way returning to the city. We see
no occasion for this interpretation. The narrative, which is
very circumstantial, seems rather to imply, that at the instant
of rising from her stooping posture, and averting her face from
the sepulchre, she saw the Lord standing near her, as it were,
before the door of the sepulchre, within her reach, and in the
view, perhaps, of the persons within the sepulchre.
John xx. 15. "Jesus said unto her: Woman, why weepest
thou? Whom seekest thou?"
The first of these inquiries is the same as that just before
made by the angels. Yet neither question was put for infor-
mation, but rather as a proof to Mary of the reality of his
bodily presence. It is not necessary to say that he needed not
that she should tell him why she wept, or whom she sought.
His voice, his appearance, and perhaps the place, suggested to
her that he was the gardener, and she replied in continuation
of her answer to the angels, which she took it for granted he
had heard.
John xx. 15. "If thou hast borne him hence, tell me Avhere
thou hast laid him, and I will take him away."
"And if thou (art the person who) bore Jiim (that is his dead
body) hence," &c. This language is perfectly natural, and just
such as would be suggested by the circumstances; and so was
the grief which lavished itself on the inanimate remains of her
departed friend. Yet these did not constitute the Lord's per-
son. Luke xxiii. 43. But how remote from her mind — we
repeat — was the thought of his resurrection from the dead!
We cannot account for Mary's mistake, but by supposing that
JESUS MAKES HIMSELF KNOWN TO MART. 471
our Lord's address to her — his appearance, voice, and manner,
were perfectly in keeping with one who might be supposed to
have the care of the garden, though it is not necessary to sup-
pose that he bore about his person any badge or indication of
that employment. The place where he appeared, and his
familiar demeanour gave rise, perhaps, to the conjecture.
Here we may remark, that a perfect power over the external
form appears to be a distinguishing attribute of spiritual
natures. We have seen examples of it in the angels who
appeared on this eventful morning, and we now have another
example of it in the person of Jesus.*
JOFIN XX. 16. "Jesus saith unto her, Mary: She turned
herself and said uuto him, Rabboni, which is to say, Master,"
[rather, "my master!"] "it is my master!"!
On seeing the angels within the sepulchre, Mary turned from
it, and in so doing she perceived Jesus, obliquely — or as we may
say — over her shoulder. In this half-averted posture he first
addressed her and she replied. But upon hearing her name
pronounced [arpaipecao) turning yet more, so as to survey his
person, instantly she recognized him. How great was her sur-
prise ! One word was all that she said, or could say. Her
highest hope and most intense desire, at that very moment,
was to find the dead body of her friend. The bitterness of
her grief she had just vented in his ear whom she sought for as
dead. She had found him, not dead, as she hoped, but alive,
which she had not thought of as possible.
Some commentators suppose that our Lord at first assumed
the tones of a strange voice, but afterwards changed them to
his own. We suppose that it was through his power over the
mind and spirit of Mary that he made himself known to her.
Her conviction of the reality of his presence and of the iden-
* We have sometimes thought our Lord tacitly alluded to this power in his
dii^course on the Mount, Matt. vi. 25, 27; Luke xii. 22, 27, "Take no thought
for your life," "nor yet for your body, for which of you {/^ifi/xm)/, though
earnestly and anxiously desiring it,) can add one cubit to his stature;" as if he
had said, Why bestow so much care and anxiety upon such frail and imperfect
structures as your mortal bodies are, which are so little under the control of
your spiritual and nobler natures? Seek rather an entrance into the kingdom
of God, where you will be endowed with immortal and glorious bodies, which
will be so perfectly subject to your spiritual natures that you will have power,
simply by taking thought, to assume any form and stature, and appear and
disappear in any part of the universe, as the service of God may require.
t -^a-i Rabban Princeps was the highest title of a Jewish teacher. Buxtorf
(see the word in his Lex. Talmud, fol. col. 217G,) says : " Titulus sunimrc dig-
nitatis circa tempora nati Christ!, nrtus in Ilillelis tiliis qui principatnin ges-
serunt, in populo Israelis per ducentos circiter aunos. Septem tantum hoc
titulo appellati fuere qui prteter doctrinam et prudentiam etiam fuerunt
fij^iu;'] principea et hujus status respectu appellati fuere singuli Rabban."
472 NOTES ON SCMPTUEE.
tity of his person appears to have been instantly full and per-
fect, just as it was eight days afterwards in the case of Thomas,
verse 28. This power is an attribute with which he will endow
the renewed nature of all his people when they shall be
changed into his likeness.
Although Mary uttered only one word at this interview, yet
it is supposed she approached him as if to touch his person, or
that she fell at his feet, as if to embrace them, which gave occa-
sion to the first part of our Lord's reply, " Touch me not."
Why should he forbid her to touch him unless she were attempt-
ing to do so ? We might admit the conjecture as plausible, or
at least as harmless, were it not made the ground of inter-
preting the rest of the sentence. If the sense of the passage
depended upon such an action of Mary, we cannot suppose it
would have been passed over in silence. We prefer to con-
sider the record, as designed to convey important instruction to
the Church, 2 Tim. iii. 16, rather than to denote a fugitive
circumstance personal to Mary and her fellow disciples.
John xx. 17. "Jesus saith unto her {fir] [xou b.7ixoo) touch
me not, for I have not yet ascended to my Father {obr^cD yap
dual^sftrjxa npoc rov nazepa poo.)
Most commentators say this is a very dark and difficult pas-
sage, and some say it is the most difficult in the history of the
resurrection ; yet it would be impossible to find a passage more
easy to be understood, if we take the words in their literal
sense. It is only when we adopt the common prejudice of a
single ascension at the end of forty days that we feel obliged
to depart from the plain sense of the words, " Touch me not,
because I have not yet ascended to my Father,"— implying,
that if he had ascended, she might touch his person. The
difficulty is to reconcile this sense with the fact that a short
time afterwards he allowed the women whom he met returning
from the sepulchre to the city, to hold him by the feet. Yet
the common belief is, he had not ascended at that time, and did
not ascend until he had given his disciples many infallible
proofs of his resurrection, by means of the touch, as well as
the senses of sight and hearing. Luke xxiv. 39 ; John xx. 25 ;
Acts i. 3;.x. 41.
This difficulty is generally got rid of, by rejecting the literal
sense, and substituting another which the words do not natu-
rally bear. Thus : Cling not to me : spend no more time with
me in joyful gratulations: For I am not going to ascend imme-
diately: Non statim ascendo—adhuc versor in terris. You will
have many opportunities of seeing me again. Therefore, go
now to my brethren without delay, and tell them (dvaj^aiuco)
THE HIGH PRIEST A TYPE OF CHRIST. 473
that I sliall ascend, depart (that is, after forty days) to my
Father and your Father ; to my God and your God.
This paraphrase converts the perfect and present tenses of
dva^acvco into the future, and assigns to {bszroiifu) the word
touch, a sense which it does not elsewhere bear.* It is remarka-
ble how very generally the commentators agree in rejecting the
literal sense. Yet we believe the literal sense, as expressed
in the authorized English version, gives the true reason of
the prohibition ; " Because I have not yet ascended to my
Father."
The high priest under the Levitical economy was a type
of Christ. He only, of all the priests, went into the holiest
place once a year, and then not without blood. Levit. xvi. 3;
Exod. XXX. 10 ; Heb. ix. 7, 12. No person was permitted to
be with him in the tabernacle of the congregationf on the great
day of expiation. Preparatory to the solemnities of that day,
the high priest was removed from his house and family during
seven days, lest he should contract a defilement which would
disqualify him for the solemn occasion. On the day of atone-
ment, he purified himself with water, before he entered on his
duties, Levit. xvi. 4; and one reason why no person was
permitted to be with him in the tabernacle at that time was, it
is probable, to prevent the possibility of ceremonial or actual
pollution, by even the slightest touch of any of the people on
whose behalf he was acting. See Broivn's Antiquities, vol. i., 548.
Now the whole of this ceremonial was typical of the sacri-
ficial work of the Lord Jesus; and when he appeared to Mary,
he was, so to speak, midway in the act of making that atone-
ment which the Levitical ceremonial and the high priest
prefigured. He, the priest and the victim, had been slain — his
blood shed, but he had not yet entered the holy place, Heb.
ix. 11, 12, that is, the Upper Sanctuary of which the earthly
was a type — or, using his own words — he had not yet ascended
to the Father, but at that very moment was on the point of
doing so. No person, therefore, could intercept, or even touch
his person at that time. Hence, as we suppose, the prohibition,
* See Canne, Brown, Blaney, Scott, Townsend, Chandler, Clarke, Diodat',
Jansenius, Bengel, Lamy, Chemnitz, Gottfried Less., Glassius, Vigerus de
Idiom. Gr. L. And, for the use of a.7rti/Atti in the New Testament, see Matt.
viii. 3, 15; ix. 20, 21, 29; xiv. 36; xvii. 7; xx. 34. Mark i. 41; iii. 10; v.
27, 28, 30, 31; vi. 56; vii. 33; viii. 22. Luke v. 13; vi. 19; vii 14, 39;
viii. 44, 45, 46, 47; xviii. 15; xxii. 51. Gottf. Less, cites Luke xviii. 15 and
1 John V. 18 to prove that oLvro/xaj may signify to embrace pr take violent hold
of. But such constructions are not only unnecessary in those places, but
very harsh.
f Some have suggested the expression, "tent of meeting," that is between
God and man, instead of Tabernacle of the Congregation. See Exod. xxix. 42,
43 ; XXV. 8 ; Rev. xxi. 3
60
474 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
"Touch me not." The type must be fulfilled in all points, and
in this as well as others.
But why, it may be inquired, did he thus show himself to
Mary, and to her only ? Why was not John or Peter or Mary
his mother, favoured with this first view of his risen person?
Or what necessity was there that he should appear to any
of his disciples before his ascension ? It is diflBcult, perhaps
quite impossible, to answer such questions with confidence,
except by saying, that such was his sovereign pleasure. Yet, if
we may be allowed to conjecture, there was a typical necessity
for the selection of some person, and a typical propriety or
exigency was fufillled by the selection of this female. Our
Lord was manifested in the flesh, that he might destroy the
works of the devil. 1 John iii. 8. This woman is spoken of
in Luke viii. 2, as having been, in a peculiar manner, the
victim of Satanic power, whom the Lord had not only delivered
from a cruel bondage, but had made an eminent example
of his grace. It is remarkable that the Evangelists, in
speaking of her, always for some cause, distinguish her from
the rest. Thus Luke, in the place just cited, viii. 2, mentions
several females, but Mary Magdalen only by name. Matthew
xxvii. 56, mentions many others, but Mary Magdalen, and
Mary the mother of James and Joses, only by name. So
Luke xxiv. 10 — though he names two others, mentions Mary
Magdalen first. No cause is assigned for the distinction,
yet it is evident it was made and recognized during our Lord's
ministry, and with his approval. It is confirmatory of this
view, that he should appear first of all to her upon the
morning of his resurrection, although so many other females
had been at the sepulchre: and the question to be resolved
is, why was this last, this crowning distinction bestowed
upon her?
She was a fit representative, as Barabbas was, of those
whom the Lord came to redeem. But with this further dis-
tinction— Barabbas was the representative of those still in
bondage to Satan; but Mary, of those delivered therefrom
through the Divine power and grace of the Saviour. In other
words: She was chosen to represent, as it were, at the altar of
the great atonement, the true Israel, or the elect people of
God; who, like her, will all be delivered from the bondage of
Satan and transformed, while living in the flesh, into his friends
and followers: although, like her, they will still be impure and
their touch defiKng, by reason of their sinful natures, until their
bodies shall be transformed by his Almighty power into con-
formity with his likeness.
But why should he exhibit himself to such a representative,
MARY A REPRESENTATIVE CHARACTER. 47§
before he entered the sanctuary above ? This is another question
equally difficult to resolve. Yet may we not suggest, that as
the people of Israel during the Levitical economy and the taber-
nacle service, stood assembled without the outer tabernacle, and
the high priest was not altogether hidden from their view, until
he entered within {xaxa'Kzxaaixa) the inner veil; so Mary was
brought to this place at the moment of the passing of our great
High Priest within the veil, i. e. his ascension to the Father,
that she might, in this respect also, fulfil the import of the typi-
cal tabernacle service.
Having thus exhibited himself to Mary Magdalen first of all,
as Mark xvi. 9* expressly informs us, he gave her a message to
his brethren, quite difi"erent from that he soon afterwards gave
the women returning from the sepulchre. Matt, xxviii. 10.
John xx. 17. "Go to my brethren, and say to them, I
ascend to my Father and your Father, to my God and your
God."
To the company of women he said nothing of his ascension
to the Father, but simply, " Go tell my brethren, that they go
into Galilee, there shall they see me." If his ascension to the
Father were to follow his appearance in Galilee, why send this
message to them before going thither? Why send it at all?
Why did he not communicate it to thein in person ? If he were
not to ascend till after forty days, he would have frequent op-
portunities of communicating this fact to them. We submit to
the judgment of the reader whether this message should not
be explained by John xvi. 28; xiii. 31; xiv. 2, 3, 12;
xvi. 5, 7, and similar passages. In his farewell discourse, he
had assured them of his speedy departure from the world to the
Father, and explained to them, as far as they were capable of
understanding him, the great benefits which this event would
bring them. He now sends them word by Mary, that he was
on the point of executing that purpose. Hence, when they
should afterwards see him in Galilee, or elsewhere, they were to
regard him, not as an inhabitant of the earth, but as come,
again to them from the Father, and who would at length come
to receive them to himself to abide for ever with him. John
* " 'E^Ktvx. — In the History of the Resurrection this word is erroneously
translated 'appearance.' An expression which in the German leads to a gross
and dangerous mistake, viz., that Jesus never showed himself, but suddenly
and with a rustling sound, such as superstition imagines a spectre to cause.
This is by no means the meaning of the Evangelist; for the word \^mm is also
used of the presentation of one with whom we are intimate and in whose so-
ciety we have long participated: e.g. Matt. vi. 5, 1(J, 18; also xiii. 26. Be-
sides, we know from Acts i. 3, 4, that the friends of Jesus enjoyed as intimate
communion with him after his resurrection as before his death." — Less on the
Resurrection,
476 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
xiv. 2, 3; xvl. 16. In accordance with this idea, he spoke of
himself in his first interview with the apostles the same evening,
as being no longer with them in his earthly jelations — as of one
belonging to another world. Luke xxiv. 44. This gracious
message, then, served to denote the moment at which his earthly
ministry was completed, just as the rending of the veil denoted
the end of the Levitical economy. Accordingly, we suppose
that having given it, the Lord instantly disappeared from the
view of Mary and appeared in the presence of the Father. The
Evangelist does not expressly say so — nor was it necessary, if
the design were such as we have supposed ; because it might be
left to be inferred by the reader.*
John xx. 18. " Mary Magdalen came [went] and told the
disciples that she had seen the Lord and he had spoken these
things unto her."
It does not appear that Mary met with any of her female
companions after she left them early in the morning at the
sepulchre to go in search of John and Peter. It is not pro-
bable she remained long at the sepulchre after the Lord dis-
appeared from her view. Peter and John had left the place
not long before, and perhaps were still on their way return-
ing to their home.- It would be natural to suppose that she
hastened as she did before in search of them, to communicate
the joyful news and correct the false impression she had made
by her too hasty conjecture; which, nevertheless, had been
confirmed by their own observations. Whether she overtook
them, or where or to whom she first delivered the Saviour's
message, we are not informed. We have reason to suppose,
* Chancellor D'Aguesseau, born at Limoges, France, Nov. 27tli, 1668, one of
the most illustrious men of the age in which he lived, makes the following reflec-
tions on this passage: "Un Dieu se faisant homme, a fait les hommes Dieux.
II s'est abaisse vers nous pour nous elever jusqu'a. lui et etablir par Ik — toute
proportion gardee — une esp6ce d'egalite entre lui et nous. (See Notes on John
xvii. 20 — 24, where this idea is developed.) C'est pour cela, que dans le m6me
endroit il appelle les ap6tres ses frdres — propter qiiam causam non confiinditur
eosfratrcs vocnre (Heb. ii. 11) dit St. Paul. II accomplit ainsi et d6s ce moment
la prophetie de David. Narrabo nomen tuum fratribus vieis. Y a-t-il rien de
plus consolant pour les Chretiens, que d'apprendre qu'ils ont un m6me Dieu et
un m6me pore que Jesus-Christ, et qu'ils sont ses freres : C'est un eifet de la
bonte extreme et toute divine du fils de Dieu d'appeller ainsi, dans I'etat de sa
puissance ceux meme, qui I'avoient abandonne dans les jours de son humilia-
tion et de ses souifrances. Les Divines Ecritures, retentissent par tout de cette
verite consolante. St. Paul nous fait souvenir dans toutes ses epitres, non seule-
ment que nous sommes les heritiers d'un Dieu vivant dans le ciel afin de niepri-
ser les choses de la terre, mais encore, que nous sommes les co-heritiers d'un
Dieu mort en croix afin de ne pas refuser de mourir avec lui sur la n6tre. Ipse
spiritus testimonium reddit spiritui nostro quod sumus filii Dei. Si mitem filii et
hceredes ; hceredes quidem Dei, cohceredes autem Christi. Quelle religion, quelle
philosophic a jamais enseigne une doctrine, si sublime, si gloi-ieiise, si pr^cieuse
pour I'homme?"
MARY COMMUNICATES WITH THE DISCIPLES. 477
however that Cleopas and his companion had not heard it when
they set out for Emmaus: for they spoke only of the appear-
ance of the angels to the other women. Luke xxiv. 22, 23.
Hence we infer that the Lord's appearance to Mary was not
known to them, nor generally known so early as the appear-
ance of the angels to the women of whom Luke speaks, although
it might have been known to Peter and John even before they
heard of the appearance of the angels. For the Evangelists
abridge all these various communications into general expres-
sions, without noticing the particulars. We are at liberty
therefore to apply them as other circumstances require.
We cannot leave this passage without saying that notwith-
standing the indefiniteness of this portion of John's Gospel in
respect to some particulars, there is an air of truthfulness about
it, that cannot escape the observation of any one accustomed
to consider and weigh the probabilities of history. We feel
that the narrative cannot be a fiction — it is so circumstantial,
so natural, even life-like: so consistent in all its parts, so con-
sonant with the characters of these three disciples, that we want
no higher or . clearer internal marks of truth. Read verses
3 and 4 — 6 and 8 ; how minute the particulars ! Again : Read
verses 5 and 6; how consistent with what we know of the
characters of Peter and John ! Now read verses 14 and 15 ;
what more natural? The two apostles saw nothing erthcr of
the angels or of the Lord. This is confessed. The solitary
witness of this wonder was a lone woman, whose excited feelings
or heated imagination skeptics would say misled her. Yet they
name her as the witness ! Would a deceiver thus write ? We
think it quite impossible.
Mark, to whom we now turn, is a little more particular in
some respects than John, although his account also is very
general. He says:
Mark xvi. 10, 11. " She [Mary Magdalen] went and told
them that had been with him, as they mourned and wept, and
they, when they heard that he was alive and had been seen by
her, believed not."
If we turn to Luke xxiv. 10, we observe that he joins Mary
Magdalen with Joanna and Mary the mother of James, and
other women as the bearers of this news, without distinction of
times or places. His object was, as has been observed, to say
once for all, and in general terms, that the apostles received
information of the occurrences at the sepulchre from the women.
He does not therefore contradict John or Mark.*
* Some commentators suppose that Luke should be understood as saying,
that Mary Magdalen and her company conveyed the information before the
478 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
It is not probable, Mark intends to include among the num-
ber of persons he refers to, the women who had been at the
sepulchre and had seen the angels and heard from them of the
Lord's resurrection. These would not be likely to discredit
Mary's words: besides, the unmingled sorrow in which Mary
found those of whom he speaks, shows that they had not yet
received any intimation of the joyful event. It is probable,
therefore, that Mark does not include Peter or John in the
number. But if, as we have supposed probable, Mary hastened
first after Peter and John and told them, and afterwards others,
we see why John should not add as Mark does, "they believed
not," because it is probable John did believe, or if not, that
both he and Peter Avere prepared by what they had seen, to
give credit to her words. Accordingly on hearing this second
communication of Mary, as we suppose,
Luke xxiv. 12. "Peter arose and ran" again "to the sepul-
chre, and stooping down he beheld the linen clothes laid by
themselves," as he had seen them before, "and departed won-
dering in himself at that which was come to pass."
Some commentators suppose that Luke here refers to the
visit which Peter made to the sepulchre in company with John.
John XX. 3. Others maintain that Peter made two visits to the
sepulchre that morning — the first in company with John, and
the oth&r alone. The question cannot be determined with cer-
tainty. We incline to the latter opinion.*
On this assumption, we conclude that Luke refers to the visit
of Peter, which was generally best known, and that John,
writing at a later period, and intending to supplement Luke,
relates an earlier visit, when he was Peter's companion. From
what we know of Peter's character, there is nothing incredible
in the supposition that Mary's account of the appearance of
the Lord to her should determine him instantly to make a
second visit. It was just like him to do so. We add; it is
other women; at least that some of them did so, to some of the apostles.
Hence they translate the aorist ixgyov, verse 10, as a pluperfect, and the -whole
verse somewhat in this way: "But there were others who had already told
these things to the apostles, namely, Mary Magdalen, Joanna, Mary the
mother of James, and other women who were with them." That is to say,
these women had conveyed the information they possessed to the apostles, or
some of them, before those Galilean women, spoken of in the preceding con-
text, returned from the sepulchre to the city. See notes on Matt, xxviii. 2.
* Some regard this verse in Luke as an interpolation made from John's
Gospel. They say it is not contained in some of the most authoritative MSS.
The language is similar, and looks, it is said, as though it had been copied
from John. But there is nothing incredible in the fact that similar words should
be employed, even by diiferent writers, to express the same ideas, nor in the
supposition that Peter made two visits. Besides, no part of the commonly
received text ought to be rejected, except upon the most convincing evidence
of spuriousness.
MARY AND HER COMPANIONS WORSHIP JESUS. 479
not improbable that the Lord appeared to Peter on this second
visit, either when he was alone at the sepulchre or on his return
from it. When should we anticipate such a gracious manifesta-
tion to Peter alone, if not on such an occasion ? Luke, it is
true, does not mention the fact in connection with the visit of
which he speaks.* The interview was secret and mysterious,
and the Holy Spirit has cast a veil over it. Only incidentally
it is mentioned, as an isolated fact, by Luke and Paul. Luke
xxiv. 34; 1 Cor. xv. 5.
The Lord having appeared to Mary Magdalen, appeared
again soon after to Mary the mother of James and her com-
panions, on their return to the city. It is probable both were
proceeding to the city at the same time, though not in com-
pany; and, if we follow the order of Luke's narrative, both
came to the apostles before Peter arose to make his second visit
to the sepulchre. As some harmonists suppose, however, Mary
Magdalen first came to the apostles, or some of them ; then
the Galilean women, of whom Luke speaks, arrived; and soon
after them, Mary the mother of James and her party. We
return now to
Matt, xxviii. 9, 10. "And as they [that Is, Mary the
mother of James and her companions] went to tell his disciples,
behold, Jesus met them, saying. All hail. And they came and
held him by the feet and worshipped him. Then said Jesus
unto them : Be not afraid. Go tell my brethren, that they go
into Galilee. There shall they see me."
According to Mark, the angel whom they had seen at the
sepulchre bade them tell the same thing to the disciples, and
particularly to Peter. Mark xvi. 7.
This especial reference to Peter, if the message were given
to him at the time we have supposed, would naturally embolden
as well as encourage him to seek an interview with the Lord,
even before going to Galilee. But without dwelling on this
point, which cannot be determined with certainty, we pass to
notice how entirely the manner and address of the Saviour dis-
pelled the fears of these women, and the full and confident
belief they had of the reality of his person. How different
were the emotions of the apostles, when, on the evening of
* We notice a similar omission in Luke i. 20. He there tells us only that
Zacharias was punished for his incredulity with dumbness. And yet it is plain
from verse 62 that he was deprived of hearing also : a fact brought in inciden-
tally, out of place, to complete the narrative. The English reader, however,
should be informed that the word (jwxfsc) translated speechless in verse 22, pro-
perly signifies deaf as well as dumb; so that this supplementary fact is sup-
plied earlier than would be supposed from our translation. This is an instance
in which Luther and the translators of the authorized version have been unduly
influenced by the Latin Vulgate, which renders xai^of by muius.
480. NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
that day, shortly after the return of Cleopas and his companion
from Eramaus, Jesus appeared in the midst of them. Luke
xxiv. 36, 37, 41. We. account for the difference by the manner
in which he made his appearance. In the case of these women,
he approached them as a stranger might do, who chanced to be
walking the same way. By his salutation simply he makes
himself perfectly known to them. They fall at his feet, wor-
shipping, and embraced them, which he now permits. They
feel no doubt of the reality and the identity of his person. He
gives them no other proof, and disappears from their view, but
how soon, or in what manner, as in the case of his appearance
to Mary, we are not informed.
We have already remarked upon the difference between the
messages he sent to his brethren by Mary Magdalen and by
these women: the one related to his ascension to the Father,
the other to his appearance in Galilee. Why did he not send
the same message to his brethren by these women as he had by
Mary Magdalen? The reason we suggest is, that he had in
the meantime ascended to the Father, and fulfilled the typical
import of the entering of the High Priest within the veil. See
notes on John xx. 17.
It is commonly taken for granted that our Lord's first
ascension into heaven was that particularly described in Acts
i. 9, after having been seen by his disciples forty days. Yet
on the evening of the day he arose he spoke of himself as no
longer a proper inhabitant of the earth in his human person.
Luke xxiv 44. Nor can it be denied that he appeared and
disappeared, from time to time, under such circumstances as
were wholly new and strange, and in no way agreeable to the
state of his body and behaviour while he was truly and properly
an inhabitant of the earth. Hence we may infer that he was
during that period ordinarily an inhabitant of the heavenly
world. Eph. iii. 20, During the ancient economy, though not
then incarnate, he frequently appeared, as the Angel Jehovah,
in a visible form, to patriarchs and other holy men; much in
the same way he appeared during these forty days to his
disciples. And why should his ascension be delayed for the
purpose of exhibiting his risen body to his disciples? Acts
x. 40, 41. Why could he not appear to them from heaven as
he afterwards did to Paul ? Is there any text which proves
that his risen body was locally confined to the earth during all
this time? The question can be resolved only by the testimony
of the sacred writers.
We have already considered the reason why our Lord
forbade Mary to touch his person. As it seems to us, the
words of our Lord are not intelligible except upon the sup-
THE WATCH COMMUNICATE WITH THE HIGH PRIESTS. 481
position that he then was about to ascend to the Father,
which Paul explains, Heb. ix. 24, ascending into heaven itself.
But Avhether this means that he ascended far above all heavens,
Eph. iv. 10, or that he passed through all heavens, Heb. iv. 14,
or that he ascended higher than the heavens, Heb. vii. 26, are
questions into which we need not inquire. We know not where
the place denoted by the Saviour's words may be, nor do we
suppose that the proper interpretation of them depends upon
any such considerations.
Yet it is probable that inadequate and even low conceptions
of the Saviour's power, have had a determining influence upon
commentators in interpreting these words. Insensibly we are
influenced by the idea of difficulty and distance, as though it
would require effort and time for the risen Saviour to ascend
to and return from the Father. Such impressions are erro-
neous, and would not be entertained a moment if we could con-
ceive adequately of the attributes with which our Lord invested
his risen human body. We know that it is the most wonderful,
the most perfect work of his almighty power and infinite skill
— the tabernacle of his omnipotence. It is neither unreason-
able nor unscriptural to believe that he who gave to the light
its velocity, and to the lightning its power, would impart to his
risen and regenerated human body, power transcending im-
measurably all the powers of created natures, so as to make it
the fit instrument of his infinite purposes. To him the uni-
verse, vast beyond our conceptions as it is, lies open to
his view, and is accessible at his will. Its remotest extremes
are to him like adjacent apartments in the Father's house.
John xiv. 2; Heb. iii. 4; John xvi. 28; iii. 13; Prov. xxx. 4.
Who that believes in the Divine nature of the Lord Jesus can
doubt his power to appear at any moment in any part of the
universe he governs ? To ascend to the Father, to enter into
the upper sanctuary, within the veil, into heaven itself, required
of him, not effort, not -time, but only the will to do it. To
return from thence to the women, as they were going from
the sepulchre to the city, was no more to him than to pass
from the garden of Joseph to the place where he met them.
We now proceed to another testimony, recorded only by
Matthew; we mean the testimony of the watch, or military
guard, to the high priests.
About the time the first party of women returned, or it may
be, while they were on their way.
Matt, xxviii. 11. " Some of the watch going into the city,
showed to the high priests all things that were done."
How many persons composed the watch we are not informed,
nor do we know how many of their number went to the high
482 NOTES ON SCRIPTUKE.
priests. The Evangelist's words would be made good if only
those of the watch went who were in command. They went
only to the chief priests, Annas and Caiaphas, (probably to the
palace,) and communicated to them the things w^hich had
occurred. At what time they went is not stated, but we may
reasonably infer that it was after sunrise. Where the watch
remained during the interval is an inquiry which we cannot
resolve. These minute particulars are not important, and for
that reason have not been recorded. Nor do we know the
especial matter of their communication. While, on the one
hand, the terrors of the scene had bereft them of the power
of minute observation, they were by the same cause most
thoroughly convinced of the presence of Divine power, and
able to exculpate themselves from all blame. The emergency
required prompt action. Accordingly,
Matt, xxviii. 12 — 14. "They [viz. the high priests] as-
sembled with the elders, and having consulted together, gave
the soldiers large money."
The body which was thus convened, composed the Sanhedrim
or Council of Seventy, established by Moses. The same body
is referred to in Matt. xxvi. 5.* It is not improbable the sol-
diers repeated before the assembled council the account they
had given to the chief priests, and were then dismissed to allow
an opportunity for private consultation. Obviously, the mea-
sure proposed, in order to be eifectual, must have embraced all
the soldiers employed on that duty ; otherwise, no concert in
their falsehood could have been expected, nor any sufficient
inducement to suppress the truth. Yet the details of this pro-
ceeding are wholly omitted. We only know the result of their
consultation and the measures they adopted.
Matt, xxviii. 13. "Saying: Say ye his disciples came by
night and stole him while we slept."
" Say ye" — to whom ? — to Pilate the governor ? The severity
of the military discipline of the Romans renders the supposition
exceedingly improbable. We can scarcely believe the soldiers
would voluntarily say to their commander that they slept on
their post and allowed the body to be stolen which they had
been set to guard. Even if Pilate did not regard the service
as an important one, he would, nevertheless, regard their neglect
of it a serious breach of duty, severely punishable. The mean-
ing of the priests, as we infer from the two verses following,
was that the soldiers should give this out to the people — the
* The word (trui'a;^6svT«c) assembled may be construed in connection with the
word {Ttm) some ot the watch. The original is somewhat indefinite, and
indeed is not grammatically exact, yet such language as an uncultivated writer
TTOuld very naturally employ.
THE SOLDIERS BRIBED. 48^
Jewish public at Jerusalem. But how? By a direct and bold
avowal of their own delinquency? Such an avowal, perhaps,
would not have accomplished the object so certainly as an indi-
rect method. We suppose they were rather to hint it from
time to time as opportunity occurred, so as to give occasion
of suspicion against themselves rather than to be open self-
accusers. In this way a rumour among the people would be
excited, which might come to the hearing of Pilate. The art-
fulness of the priests consisted, in the judgment of some com-
mentators, not so much in the invention of the falsehood as in
their contrivance for its diiFusion ; while others, not perceiving
this, find nothing but a gross inconsistency in the report itself,
•which stamps it as a palpable falsehood. "Did the soldiers
sleep? How then could they know the disciples stole the
body? Did they see the disciples take it away? How then
could they be asleep?"
Such an interpretation greatly underrates the malicious inge-
nuity of the members of the Sanhedrim; so much so, as to
reflect upon the credibility of the Evangelist. We cannot
easily believe, that these astute, crafty men, after having
resolved to propagate a falsehood as the only means of extri-
cating themselves from discredit with the people, would contrive
one palpably contradictory in itself. Probably the priests and
elders in secret council, resolved to fall back on the suggestion
they made to Pilate, as the reason why he should order a guard
to be stationed at the sepulchre. Matt, xxvii. 63, 64, and pre-
tend that what they feared had been realized, notwithstanding
the precaution Pilate had adopted. In this way they compli-
mented their own sagacity, as well as maintained consistency.
Not being there themselves, they could not be supposed to
know of their own knowledge, whether it was through the wdlful
connivance or negligence of the guard that the mischief hap-
pened, but they insisted no doubt, that in one or the other way
it must have happened; the latter supposition might be ad-
mitted as the most charitable. As for a dead man coming to
life, and coming out of a sepulchre so securely closed — the idea
is preposterous ! This, or something of this tenor, the priests
would very probably say. Then, to guard against any contra-
dictory statement from the soldiers, they bribed them to let the
aflFair take the course suggested, rather favouring it by inuendoes
and a suppression of the truth. Thus arranged, the rulers on
the one hand might say, "What we foresaw and forewarned the
governor against, and earnestly besought him to prevent, not-
withstanding all our pains, actually occurred. His disciples
came by night and stole the body away : a thing which could
not have happened if the guard had been faithful. How it
484 NOTES ON SCRIPTUKE.
happened they best know. The most charitable supposition is,
that they fell asleep, and the disciples, watching their oppor-
tunity, opened the sepulchre and purloined the body."
The soldiers played their part in the deception, as we may
suppose, not by, denying, but by ambiguous conduct, rather
confirming the bold assertions of the priests and rulers. How
easy, how natural was it for them to say, confidentially
to some friend, that not supposing any person would dare to
come to a place thus guarded at the dead hour of the night,
and believing that the apprehension of any attempt to steal
the body was quite preposterous, they were not so watchful
as perhaps they ought to have been ; and, in fact, that drowsi-
ness might have overtaken them while each depended on the
vigilance of the others, and while they were in that condition
the disciples might have taken the body without their knowing
it. An explanation of this sort, made in confidence, would
almost certainly be repeated, with additions at each repetition,
till it would pass from mouth to mouth among the common
people as a positive fact. It requires but little observation of
human nature, to perceive how an effect of this kind could be
accomplished. The tendency of the popular mind to ex-
aggerate and falsify even true accounts is proverbial. To this
natural disposition or vice of the human heart the priests and
rulers appealed, as we suppose, substantially, if not circum-
stantially, in the way suggested, in order to extricate them-
selves from the serious difiiculty in which the truth would
have involved them. The contrivance answered the purpose,
for the time, of parrying the shock which the unvarnished
truth would have made on the public. Yet, if we reflect but a
little on the circumstances, the extreme improbability, if not
impossibility of the report, will be apparent. How improbable
it is that all the soldiers, were there only three of them, should
have been asleep at the same time, and so profoundly that
neither -of them should have been awakened by the noise made
by the rolling away of the large stone — the bringing forth of
the body after liberating it from the bandages in which it was
wrapped up ! Again, only a few hours before, all the disciples
had fled through fear, glad to escape with their lives. They
convened secretly with closed doors, as companions in sorrow
and misfortune, but so far as we know, for no other reason.
They had given up all hope in Jesus as Messiah. They had
even embalmed his body to preserve it a little while from cor-
ruption, and others, not knowmg that it had been done, pre-
pared spices, and came to the sepulchre to do it.
Again, if we contrast the conduct of the apostles and that
of their rulers during the three days just closed, with their
PROMISES OF PROTECTION TO THE SOLDIERS. 485
conduct, respectively, on the day of Pentecost and the days
following it, we shall find it quite impossible to give credit
to such a report, even for a moment. For then these timid
disciples came boldly before the people in the temple, at
Jerusalem, and in the face of the rulers preached the resur-
rection of Jesus. They boldly charged them with the murder
of Jesus, the Holy One, and the Just, and the Prince of
life. No attempt was made by the priests and rulers to
disprove their assei'tion. On the contrary, thousands of the
common people, and a great many priests, fully believed
the fact, and joined the apostles. To this proof we shall return
hereafter.
Matt, xxviii. 14. " And if this shall come to the governor's
ears, [rather before the governor,'] we will persuade him and
secure you."
This promise was in addition to the gift of money. It proves
that the soldiers were rather to conceal the matter from the
governor than to declare it to him. There were chances that
the governor would not hear it, for he commonly resided at
Cnesarea Palestina ; and if he should not hear it, they would be
safe; but if the rumour should reach him, and he should take
judicial notice of their delinquency, then they promise to per-
suade, or win him over to their side. What means they intended
to employ they do not say. It is not to be supposed they would
be so unwise as to tell the soldiers in plain terms that they
would {-ecdscv* dp-fupuo vel ip-qiiaai) bribe him, which was no
doubt their purpose. They knew the character of Pilate. He
is represented by contemporary authors as most unjust, avari-
cious, and venal. He had committed innumerable robberies and
other acts of flagrant injustice. With him, everything was ac-
counted right which was profitable to his purse. Nothing could
be easier than to persuade such a judge and secure the soldiers
against his displeasure.
Matt, xxviii. 15. " So they [the soldiers] took the money
and did as they were taught; and this saying is commonly re-
ported among the Jews until this day."
This Evangelist wrote his Gospel, it is probable, about the
year a. d. 41.
Until that time, the report was common among the unbeliev-
ing Jews of Palestine. He gives us no reason to suppose that
Pilate, or the Romans, or any Gentile nation ever gave credit
to it. On the contrary, if we may believe Justin Martyr,
Afol. II., Tertullian, A-pol. cap. v. 21, and Eusehius^ lib. ii.
cap ii., Pilate wrote to Tiberius such an account of the life and
* A euphemism to express a sinister purpose, or rather to cover it up.
486 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
miracles of the Lord Jesus Christ that he was willing to have
the Senate decree Divine honours to him. Eusehius intimates
that Pilate spoke of his resurrection and ascension. But the
unbelieving Jews took great pains to spread and perpetuate this
false report among their own people, as is proved by the writings
of their Rabbins. The Evangelist does not inform us, in ex-
press terms, what account the assembled priests and elders
agreed upon in their meeting, but only upon what they desired
the soldiers to say. We have conjectured that they fell back
upon the suspicion they expressed to Pilate, which they may
have moulded into the story contained in a very blasphemous
book called Toledoth Jeschu^^ the absurdity of which, as it
seems to those who have the New Testament, appears from the
fact that it ascribes the theft of the Lord's body to Judas Isca-
riot, who told it to one of their sages, and by that means they
discovered the body, after it had been stolen, under the bed of
a river or stream where it had been secreted.
But even this story tends to establish the truth of Matthew's
narrative ; for it admits the fact that the sepulchre, after having
been thus secured, was found empty. Yet it was quite impossi-
ble for the friends of Jesus to purloin the body, for the reasons
already suggested. How, then, can we account for the admitted
fact except as the Evangelist does? And if he arose from the
dead, what more probable than that the rulers — his enemies —
to save their credit with the people, should invent such a fable?
We now return to the other appearances of the Lord on this
eventful day. Turning to Mark we find,
Mark xvi. 12, "that after" his appearance to Mary "he ap-
peared in another form (iv krzpa iJ-opiprf) unto two of them as
they walked and went into the country."
This is a very brief and general account of an appearance
which Luke records more at length, which we shall next notice.
By another form, Mark means a form different from that in
which he appeared to Mary, or in a form different from that he
bore during his personal ministry. Mark leaves us to infer that
these two recognized him, because, he says, they went and told
it to the residue. But he does not tell us when or how, or what
passed between them, nor to what place they were going. Some
commentators suppose the change in his appearance arose from
the change of his dress ; that there was, in fact, no change in
his person. Others inquire whether his dress was not visionary,
* The principal pai't, if not the whole of this book, is transcribed into Eisen-
menger's Entdecktes Judenthum, see vol. i. p. 189, and translated into German.
It is also published in Wagenseil's Tela Ifpica Satance. It is said the Jews
have the custom to read this book in their houses on Christmas eve, in order
to dishonour Christ and teach their children to blaspheme.
THE WALK TO EMMAUS. 487
and if not, how, when, or where he procured it ; whether he
created it, or received it from an angel ; whether it was the
dress he wore before he suffered? Such inquiries cannot be
resolved by the text, nor would they shed light on the way of
salvation if they could be. In connection with this text we
now turn to
Luke xxiv. 13. "And behold two of them went that same
day to a village called Emmaus, which was from Jerusalem
about three-score furlongs."
Luke here supplies us with some particulars which Mark
passed over. Cleopas, he says, was one of the two disciples,
and the place in the country they were going to was Emmaus,
a village about seven and a half or eight miles distant from
Jerusalem, situated, as is supposed, at the north-west, say
about three hours' walk from the city.
Luke xxiv. 14, 16. "And they talked together of all these
things which had happened, and it came to pass, while they
communed and reasoned, Jesus himself drew near and went
with them ; but their eyes were holden that they should not know
him."
This is the first appearance of the Lord mentioned by Luke,
being the same as the second mentioned by Mark. It was pro-
bably the fourth. Cleopas, it is supposed, was otherwise called
Alpheus. He was the husband of Mary, the sister of Mary
the mother of Jesus, and the father of James the less, Matt.
X. 3; Luke vi. 15; John xix. 25; and of Joseph or Joses.
His wife, consequently, was that other Mary who accompanied
Mary Magdalen early in the morning to the sepulchre. Matt.
xxviii. 1; xxvii. 56, 61. We have seen that on her return
from the sepulchre the Lord appeared to her and her com-
panion, and permitted them to embrace his feet. It is proba-
ble, therefore, that Cleopas left Jerusalem for Emmaus before
Mary his wife returned to the city from the sepulchre, or at
least before he met with her. He shared deeply in the attach-
ment which she bore to the Saviour. His countenance, verse
17, showed his sadness, and his conversation the burden of his
heart, verse 14. Had he felt otherwise, it is not probable he
would have been thus favoured.
The topics of their conversation, we may safely infer, were
those enumerated in verses 19 — 24: Jesus of Nazareth, the
greatest of the prophets; the sin and folly of the priests and
rulers in procuring his crucifixion ; their own disappointed
hopes ; the startling report of the women who were early at the
sepulchre ; the confirmation of it in part by some of their male
companions. What themes !
While they were communing and reasoning, Jesus drew near,
488 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
in the guise of a stranger, and walked along with them. Mark,
we have seen, intimates that his form was changed. Luke inti-
mates that an effect was produced upon their vision. Both
amount to the same thing, for both describe the cause from the
effect, which might be produced by the Divine power in many
ways, but in what way could not be known except by revela-
tion, which in this matter appears to have been withheld,^as not
important or not proper to be known. But do we inquire why
on this occasion, and to these disciples only, he exhibited him-
self in this manner, and why he designedly kept up their illu-
sion until he disappeared from their view ? Without attempting
directly to answer these questions, let us advert to the effect
accomplished by these means. If we read the whole passage,
verses 15 — 32, we perceive that from the instant of his joining
them, during the whole journey, until he disappeared from
them, they were perfectly at ease with him as with an equal.
Indeed, Cleopas at first seems to assume some superiority, or, at
least, he seems to be conscious of having the advantage by his
superior knowledge of current events. "Art thou only a
stranger in Jerusalem, and yet dost not know the things that
have come to pass there in these days?" This remark implies
a degree of surprise that any person should be so ignorant as
to ask the question he was replying to, even if he were only a
stranger in Jerusalem.
Luke xxiv. 19. "And he said unto them, What things?"
Such a question following upon the remark of Cleopas would
not only leave undisturbed his impression of his own superior
information, but call forth a statement of the subjects upon
which the Lord desired to instruct them. Approaching them,
then, in this way, he invested the interview with the drapery of
common life — kept their minds tranquil and open to the instruc-
tion he intended to impart. Continuing with them through the
greater part of the way, as we may infer from verse 27 that
he did, he gave them indubitable proofs of the reality of his
human person, which were still further confirmed at the end of
their journey by his partaking of food with them, and after-
wards by his closing the interview with an act he had often
performed in their presence, which instantly reminded them of
his person. Was it possible for them, after such an interview,
under such circumstances, so long continued and with such
proofs as they must have had during this long walk of his
human bodily presence, to doubt whether he was truly a man
having flesh and bones, or a mere spirit? Their astonishment
came after the designed impression had been made, and could
not invalidate the previous conviction of the reality of his
bodily presence. The effect of a sudden, unlooked-for, miracu-
ERRONEOUS VIEWS OF CLEOPAS AND HIS COMPANION. 489
lous appearance would have been very different, as we shall see
hereafter.
Luke XXIV. 19. "And they said unto him, Concerning
Jesus of Nazareth, which was a prophet mighty in word and
deed before God and all the people."
Cleopas answered the first question, and perhaps this ques-
tion also. The answer, however, is ascribed to both; but
whichever of the two spoke, the record is historically exact.*
Luke xxiv. 20, 21. "And how the chief priests and our
rulers delivered him to be condemned to death, and have cruci-
fied him. But we trusted that it had been he which should
have redeemed Israel. And besides all this, to-day is the third
day since these things were done."
Observe the mixture of feeling, perhaps we should say, the
disturbed or unsettled judgment of these attached disciples.
Evidently they did not know what to think about these un-
looked-for events. While they held firmly to the belief that he
was not only a true prophet, but the greatest of the prophets
that had appeared, he was not in other respects what they took
him to be. During his ministry they were confident he was
the promised Messiah, whose mission and ofiice would be the
redemption of Israel. But in this they supposed they were
mistaken; and this expectation, however cherished, was cut
off, so they thought, by an ignominious death. These things
seemed to prove, that although he was a true and a very great
prophet, yet he was not the Messiah, the Redeemer of Israel.
Consequently, the national hope was still longer to be deferred,
and Israel must yet remain, how long they knew not, in bondage
to their enemies. But this was not all:
Luke xxiv. 22, 2-3. " Certain women also of our company
made us astonished who were early f at the sepulchre. And
* While they speak of the Lord Jesus with the greatest respect, it is remark-
able that they do aot give him the higher title which he claimed — Son of God.
Perhaps they thought it not expedient to allude to such a subject in conversa-
tion with one whom they took to be a stranger; or perhaps their own views of
bis Divine nature were not, at that time, clearly defined. We observe also a
common Hebrew circumlocution, to express the superlative degree: "A
prophet mighty before God," means a 7)iost miff ht^ pi-op het, the greatest of the
prophets. See other examples in Gen. vi. 11; x. 9.
f 'Opbpioi or cf&fm;, from cpSfo;, see verse 1. TivofAivctt cfQpiM is one of thos
beautiful classic expressions which we every now and then find in the New
Testament in close connection with the peculiar idioms of Hellenistic Greek;
as in this verse, where i?ri with the accusative is used for or^oc, prope, near by;
and in the next verse oTrrsLo-ictv ayy(\a>y iu>i>ijtivxt, which is a Hebrew pleonasm,
see Glassius; and in general we may say of the Gospels and apostolical writings,
that the nature of the subjects of which their authors treat, and the state of
mind in which they write, often beget the most lofty conceptions, and rhetorical
figures not unworthy of the most polished writers.
62
490 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
when they found not his body, they came saying that they had
also seen a vision of angels, who said that he was alive."
We learn from verse 11 how the report affected them. It
was too incredible to be seriously considered. So, at least,
some of the apostles thought ; yet not all of them.
Luke xxiv. 24. "For certain of them which were with us
went to the sepulchre, and found it even so as the women had
said, but him they saw not."
That is, they found the stone rolled away — the sepulchre
open — the body gone, but they saw nothing more. How could
all these things be reconciled ? How could he be the greatest
of the prophets, and yet not the Messiah ? How could he be
the Messiah and yet be rejected by the chief priests and rulers,
and even put to death with the consent, nay, upon the demand
of his own people? John xii. 34. Impossible! And then
again, how could he die and be laid in the sepulchre until the
third day, and after that come to life again ? And were that
possible, how could it prove him to be the Messiah, the Re-
deemer of Israel ? To these difficulties, especially the last, our
Lord addressed himself.
Here we pause for the present; first suggesting to the reader,
for his consideration, the question, " In what respects were the
views of these devoted and faithful disciples of the office and
work of Christ erroneous or defective?" That they were so in
some respects is evident from the two following verses, but that
their error consisted simply or chiefly in their expecting the
restoration of Israel to the land of the covenant, and their
deliverance from their bondage to the nations, as many com-
mentators suppose, is by no means clear.
CHAPTER XIII.
Walk to Emmaus. — Prophecies in the books of Moses concerning Christ. —
Jewish custom. — Recognition of the disciples. — New views of the Prophetic
Scriptures obtained by them. — The Lord's appearance to Peter. — Universality
of the belief of the spirit world. — Christ with his disciples as he was with
Abraham in the plain of Mamre. — The disciples advance in knowledge. — A
new commission. — Inauguration of the new dispensation. — Powers and gifts
conferred on the apostles and personal to them at the opening of the new
dispensation, not transmitted to bishops, elders, &e. in later years. — The
Ascension. — Offering of divine worship.
Luke xxiv. 25, 26. "Then he' said unto them, 0 fools and
slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken."
0 ye unthinking, inconsiderate men ! How slow ye are to
comprehend the predictions of the prophets concerning the
ERRONEOUS VIEWS OF CLEOPAS AND HIS COMPANION. 491
promised Deliverer of Israel? "Ought not Christ to have
suffered (jradscu) these things and to enter (xai tiaeXdecv^ to liave
entered) into his glory?"* Was it not Divinely appointed, as
an indispensable part of the plan of redemption, (even of that
redemption of Israel in the flesh, to which you ignorantly limit
your expectations and your hopes) that the Christ should suffer
those very things, which cause your doubts and your sorrows,
before he should enter into his glory, of which (glory) you have
very low conceptions?
That these disciples, loving and faithful as they were, enter-
tained very inadequate views of the dignity, office, and work of
Christ, is conclusively proved by this reply. Yet the Lord had
frequently warned them, not only in figurative, but in the
plainest language, that his personal ministry would end in his
rejection and death, and that his exaltation and glory with the
Father would follow. See Matt. xvi. 21; xvii. 22; xx. 17—19;
Mark viii. 31; ix. 31; x. 33; Luke ix. 22; xii. 50; xvii.
31 — 34; xxiv. 6, 7; Matt. xxvi. 31, 32; John xvii. 5. It is
worth while to pause a little, and consider how they could thus
err, and wherein their error lay. The subject is a large one.
In this connection we can consider only the principal points,
and those briefly.
(L) According to the common apprehension of the Jews of
our Lord's day, even of the most spiritually-minded and devout,
the Messiah was to be regarded chiefly as the promised De-
liverer of Israel from their bondage to the Gentiles. Luke i.
68 — 75. That there were predictions which justified the
expectations of such a deliverance, cannot reasonably be
doubted. 2 Sam. vii. 10 — 24 ; 1 Chron. xvii. 9—27 ; Isa. i.
26 ; Jer. xxiii. 5, 6; xxxiii. 7 — 15, and 20 — 26; Lev. xxvi.
42; Ps. xcviii. 3; cv. 8, 9; cvi. 44 — 48. The promises made
to Abraham, literally understood, included the gift of the land
of Canaan, in which they, a remnant of Israel, then dwelt,
with which they connected their national redemption and glory.
See Gen. xiii. 14—17; xv. 18—21; xvii. 5—8; xxvi. 2—4;
xxviii. 10 — 15; xxii. 16 — 18. The Messiah was the promised
Prince, through whom these expectations were to be realized.
He was to be a descendant of David, and his right to the
throne and the crown of David, they expected, would be
devolved to him by descent from that monarch, according to
the covenant God made with him. His dominion and rule,
when once it should begin, they expected and believed would
continue without interruption or change for ever. John xiii.
» Both these verbs are aorist, and may with equal propriety be translated
by the perfect infinitive.
492 NOTES ON SCKIPTURE.
84 ; Ps. Ixxxix. 36, 37 ; ex. 4 ; Isa. ix. 7 ; Ezek. xxxvii. 25 ;
Dan. ii. 44; vii. 14; Micali iv. 7. Thej believed, indeed, that
Messiah's kingdom would be terrestrial, but in no sense limited
in respect to the time of its duration. Undoubtedly they were
right in their expectation of such a redemption, if the promises
made to their fathers might be literally understood. That
Zacharias, the father of John the Baptist, so understood them,
is plain from his allusion to the oath which God sware unto
Abraham, Luke i. 73, 74, compare with Gen. xvii. 16, 17,
" that he would grant unto us, that we, being delivered out of
the hand of our e7iemies, might serve him without fear in holi-
ness and righteousness before him all the days of our life."
See 2 Sam. vii. 10; 1 Chron. xvii. 9. We may add, that the
language and conduct of our Lord himself, justified and con-
firmed this national hope. See Acts i. 6 — 9 ; Luke xix.
37—44; Mark xi. 9, 10; Matt. xxi. 40; ii. 2, 3; John i. 49,
50; Luke xxii. 29.
That there were diversities of expectations and hopes among
the Jews in regard to the moral character of their nation in its
restored state, we cannot reasonably doubt. The carnal and
Avorldly, it is probable, entertained low views of the holiness
and purity of the expected kingdom, while the devout, like
Zacharias, connected with the national deliverance holiness and
righteousness in a higher degree than the nation had ever ex-
hibited. Luke i. 75; Isa. Ix. 21.
(2.) Few, if any, of the pious, excepting those who were
especially taught it by the Holy Spirit, had any conception of
the means necessary to accomplish this redemption of Israel
according to the flesh, from their temporary subjection to the
Gentiles. Like Nicodemus, they thought that Messiah's king-
dom would be effectually brought nigh to the nation, just so
soon as he should appear. No other preparation of heart, they
supposed, was necessary, than such as was attainable by means
then within their reach. Here they erred: for inseparably con-
nected with this loiver salvation or redemption, was their deliver-
ance from sin, Luke i. 77 ; John viii. 32 — 36, and their perfec-
tion in holiness as a nation, Isa. Ix. 21; liv. 13; liii. 1; John
vi. 45; Ps. xxxvii. 11, 22; Matt. v. 48, and these could not be
attained consistently with the Divine plan except by the suffer-
ings of Christ. To this defect in their faith, as we suppose,
our Lord especially alluded in the words "ought not (the) Christ
to have suffered?" &c.
(3.) Again; they had no conception of God's purpose to
gather an elect people or church out of all nations, and to exalt
it far above all terrestrial glory and bliss, by bringing it into
intimate and everlasting union with himself, through Christ cru-
ERRONEOUS VIEWS OF THE DISCIPLES ACCOUNTED FOR. 493
cifiecl and glorified. This purpose, so far as we can discover,
was first plainly disclosed in our Lord's intercession witli the
Father, which the Evangelist John has recorded, chap, xvii.,
for the instruction of the Church. Cleopas perhaps had not
heard those wonderful words ; but if he had, he did not compre-
hend them ; for Paul speaks of this Divine purpose as a mystery,
hid in Grod from the beginning of the world, until it was revealed
to the apostles by his Spirit, Eph. iii. 1 — 11, which was not
given until after the events we are now considering. This is an
important consideration. It shows us how we may account for
the defective views of the first followers of Christ, without
ascribing to them carnal and mere worldly hopes. The build-
ing of such a church involved most unexpected events; such as
the rejection of Israel according to the flesh for a season. Matt,
xxi. 43, the opening of a dispensation of grace to all nations,
which was to continue during an undefined period of time, until
the number of the elect, as settled in the Divine purpose, should
be fully accomplished. See notes on John xvii., and notes on
Luke xviii. 7. They knew not these things, simply because the
Spirit of God as yet had not taught them. Eph. iii. 5.
(4.) Moreover, these disciples did not understand God's pur-
pose to redeem the earth itself from the curse and restore it to
its lost place in his universal kingdom. See notes on Matt,
iii. 2, and xix. 28.
They limited, in fact, Jehovah's promises of redemption to
the earthly house and throne of David, and to the deliverance
of Israel according to the flesh from Babylonian and Roman
bondage, to which they were then subject. They hoped for
pre-eminence among the nations of the earth in its present con-
dition. Consequently the redemption of Israel from bondage
to the Gentiles, and their restoration to the land God gave to
Abraham, was a much more glorious event, according to the
Divine purpose, than they conceived it to be; for it included
the deliverance, not only of their own land, but of the whole
earth from the bondage of the curse : — of their people from the
bondage of sin, John viii. 36, and their pre-eminence in dignity,
glory, and power, among holy and redeemed nations, in the
world restored from the eff"ects of the curse, and re-invested
with the beauty and glory of Paradise. But the crowning glory
of all these blessings is yet to be mentioned — we mean the res-
toration of the Theocracy — the reign of Jehovah Jesus over
Israel restored and made perfectly holy, and over the whole
earth, in peerless majesty. Cleopas .and his companion had no
such thoughts as these. They had fixed their hearts upon a
national deliverance and terrestrial blessings, such as the world
in its present condition may aflbrd; in which they hoped
494 ■ NOTES ON SCRIPTURE. .
to share, in common with the pious and the good of their own
people. They thought not of that Divine sonship and that
better inheritance which Christ had purchased for them and for
all his elect, John i. 12, comprising within itself eternal life and
glory, enlargement from the clogs and restraints of their fleshly
natures, together with exaltation far above all other creatures,
in virtue of their union with him, their Redeemer. John xvii.
To enlarge and correct their views on these and kindred topics,
so far as' they were capable of receiving the instruction, we may
suppose was the chief object of our Lord's discourse with them,
as they pursued their journey to Emmaus.
Luke xxiv. 27. "And beginning at Moses and all the
prophets, he expounded unto them, in all the Scriptures, the
things concerning himself."
It is evident from this verse, that there are prophecies in the
books of Moses concerning Christ, and such we reckon Gen.
iii. 15; xxii. 1 — 9 and 18; xxvi. 4; xlix. 10, 11; Deut.
xviii. 15; Numb. xxi. 9. Yet some commentators admit only
one. Gen. xxii. 18, if we except the typical representations of
the Levitical service. This opinion is quite erroneous. Heb.
xi. 26; xii. 26; Acts. xxvi. 22; 1 Cor. x. 4. Whether these
were all the places which our Lord explained we can only con-
jecture. Proceeding to the prophets we may imagine he cited
and explained such as Ps. xvi. 8 — 10 ; xxii. ; cxxxii. 11 ; Isa.
vii. 14; Jer. xxiii. 5; Ezek. xxxiv. 23; Dan. ix. 24 — 26;
Micah V. 2; Zech. vi. 12; Micah vii. 20.
It has been said, also, that the number of the prophecies
which the Lord cited and explained on this occasion must have
been small, because before the journey to Emmaus was ended
he had very exactly gone through all of them. But we must
not imagine that our Lord's method of unfolding the Scriptures
was in any respect like that to which we are accustomed.
Volumes, no doubt, might be written to unfold the meaning of
the few we have cited, without perhaps making them any clearer
either to the unlearned or the learned, while he who perfectly
comprehended the whole of the Scriptures, and who spake as
never man spake, could comprise the whole in a brief discourse.
The voluminous and conflicting commentaries which Ave have
upon even small portions of the Scriptures, are sad evidence of
the ignorance of the learned. Job xxxviii. 2, as well as of the
unlearned, for whom such labours are especially designed.
Luke xxiv. 28, 29. "And they drew nigh unto the village
whither they went, and he made as though he would have gone
further, [that is, he seemed to them as if he intended or inclined
to go further, as he would have done if they had not] con-
strained him, saying : Abide with us ; for it is towards evening,
EVENTS OF THE DAY OF CHRIST'S RESURRECTION. 495
and tlie day' is fiir spent. And he went in [as if he intended]
to tarry with them."
It was a custom, we are told, among the Jews, not to enter
the house of any one as a guest without being invited, and the
Lord Jesus, by continuing his course onward as they were part-
ing from him, until invited to stay with them, merely complied
with that custom. Undoubtedly he would have parted from
them and passed onward, had they not earnestly requested him
to abide with them. This conduct of the Saviour, then, affords
no colour of justification to falsehood, or dissimulation, or
insincerity, though it does justify a compliance with the inno-
cent usages of society.
It is more important to observe, however, how fully persuaded
these disciples were, that he was simply and merely a man like
themselves.
Their hearts were deeply affected by his conversation; they
desired to enjoy more of it, and that was the motive of their
urgency. Had they supposed him to be an angel or a spirit,
or more or less than a man of like susceptibilities with them-
selves, would they have addressed him in such language ?
Luke xxiv. 30. " And it came to pass as he sat at meat
with them, he took bread and blessed it [or gave thanks] and
brake and gave to them."
We are not informed whether this action was performed at
the beginning or at the end of the meal. But as it was one of
the objects, perhaps the chief object of his intercourse at this
time with these disciples, to give them convincing and indu-
bitable evidence of his resurrection, it is probable that he had
already partaken of food with them ; for this was one of the
proofs much insisted upon by the apostles. Acts x. 41 ; Luke
xxiv. 4L*
We are expressly informed, that he reclined with them at
the table, as if to partake of food (Iv t^;y 6 xop:o^ dvvco^) an em-
phasis—an air of earnestness, which seems to say, that now
indeed, they were really convinced. The report of the women
they disregarded, verse 11, but Simon's account of the Lord's
appearance to him convinced them. " Truly Uvrco^:, in reality!
the Lord is risen, and hath appeared," &c. But how can we
reconcile this interpretation with Mark xvi. 13^ We have
taken It for granted, that the two disciples referred to in Mark
XVI. 12, were Cleopas and his companion; and Mark says, verse
13, that when they went and told what they had seen and heard
. to the residue, they were not believed. Yet, according to what
Luke here says, the eleven had already been convinced by the
appearance to Simon. *^
We suppose that Mark, in the 18th verse, does not refer to
the eleven, but to others, to whom these disciples related the
same things. Observe, Mark uses, verse 13, the expression
(mc locTTocz) the residue, to denote the persons who did not be-
lieve while m the next verse he denotes the apostles by the
words (ro.c kvoexa) "the eleven," as Luke does. Who those
others were, and where Cleopas and his companion found them,
and no? ^0^?'"^ ^''^l'^"'^' '""'* ^^ ^"^'''''"^ *° ^"''^ '''^'^^' &°-) ^^^ eleven,
and not to Cleopas and liis companion. The true reading is, without doubt
Zl7i:f r' "^rr . '^'^ «°-ection requires it. For^Siiion iasn t on^
Whrsl ZJth/'f t° Emmaus, and if he were, Cleopas had also seen Jesus.
Z/.l W^V^^ '^"';P''' '''^' '^ ^'"^"^ ^^« ^"e of them, that the Lord
an?.TTh' ^T^ '"''^'''^ ".^'^'"S Cleopas, if they referred to the appear-
ance to them on their way to Emmaus? The meaning is, that during the
hJZZ *!^r«'^''"P^'' '\ \^^ ^'''''^^ '^°°^'^ at Jerusalem that the Lord
had appeared to Simon; and this they were conversing abou. when Cleopas
and his companion entered to tell them of yet another appearance.
DO
498 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
we are not informed. Did they meet them on their return to
the city from Emmaus, or in the city before they joined the
eleven? Did they meet them on the same or on the succeeding
day ? These questions we cannot answer. Thus much, how-
ever, is evident : the 13th and 14th verses of Mark are not to
be understood as referring to the same time or persons, and this
is sufficient to remove the appearance of contradiction.
Still it is objected that Mark, in the 14th verse, represents
the eleven as incredulous, notwithstanding what Luke affirms,
of the effect of the testimony of Peter. This objection we
shall notice hereafter.
Cleopas and his companion, finding the apostles engaged in
animated joyful conversation about what Simon had seen and
heard, which, probably, Simon himself had related to them, or
to some one of their number, they interrupt the conversation,
and go on to relate —
Luke xxiv. 35. "What things" had happened to them while
they were "in the way" going to Emmaus, "and how he was
known of them in breaking of bread;" that is, during the meal
or repast they took with him at that place.
An orderly narrative, as the original word k^r^youvro implies,
of all that occurred from the time the Lord joined them on the
way, until he disappeared, would probably have required a con-
siderable time. The phraseology allows us to believe that their
story was not interrupted till the substance of it was told. And
with what intense interest must it have been listened to by the
company ! We can only judge of it by the hold which we know
everything that concerned Jesus had upon their minds. The
expression "in the breaking of bread" is idiomatic, and signifies,
as before intimated, during the meal or repast. We do not un-
derstand it as intended to denote the particular act mentioned
in verse 30, but in the general sense explained.
Luke xxiv. 36, 37. "And as they thus spake," while they
were yet speaking, "Jesus himself stood in the midst of them,
and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. But they were terri-
fied and affi'ighted, and supposed they saw a spirit."
This eff"ect of the sudden, and we may add, miraculous ap-
pearance of the Lord, is just that which might have been antici-
pated, notwithstanding they appear to have been convinced
before of the fact of his resurrection. It furnishes a reason, as
we suppose, for the difi'erent method the Lord observed in his
approach to Mary Magdalen, and to Cleopas and his compa-
nion. It requires but little ob'servation of human nature to
know the extreme dread and terror all men instinctively feel
when anything supernatural is supposed to occur. The real or
supposed appearance of a departed spirit excites such a sensa-
EVENTS OF THE DAY OF CHRIST'S RESURRECTION. 499
tion of nearness to the unseen world, that the most resolute spirit
quails and recoils at the sight. We regard such an event as a
significant intimation of what exists behind the veil — an antici-
pation, so to speak, of a power yet to be universally felt, in the
full development of good or evil.
It is pertinent to remark, also, how universally this belief of
the spirit-world is spread among men. It is not peculiar to any
nation, or age, or religion. The refined Athenians of antiquity
and the Romans believed in a world of spirits. The uncivilized
Hottentot and the savage Caribbean, of more modern times,
have held the same belief. The ancient Jews, perhaps we
should except the Sadducees, also believed in the reality of
spirits. Philosophy has no arguments to refute the dogma, nor
to secure mankind against fears from this source.*
Revelation alone can furnish us with any solid knowledge on
this subject. From this source we know that there are angels
good and bad. We also know that they are under the control
of a higher power, and can no more transcend the laws
appointed to them, than we can the laws appointed to us. We
knoAV, also, that the souls of men exist after they have left
their bodies in the places appointed to them, being consaous of
their condition and their destiny, but without the Divine per-
mission they have no more power to appear to, or hold converse
with us, during their disembodied state, than we have to appear
among them in our fleshly corporeal forms. But to return to
the text.
Luke xxiv. 38, 39, 40. " And he said unto them, why are
ye troubled, and why do thoughts [questionings, doubts] arise
in your hearts ? Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I
myself. Handle me and see : for a spirit hath not flesh and
bones as ye see me have; and having said this, he showed them
his hands and his feet."
Our Lord seems to admit that spirits may appear to men,
(when permitted) but he says nothing expressly of the kind of
spirits — whether human or angelic. His object did not require
him to do so. He wished to remove their misapprehension in
relation to himself and their fears, which he did by giving
them a test by which they could surely know that he was not a
disembodied spirit. He does not assert that a spirit may not
* Cfilmet has ■written Dissertations sur les Apparitions des Anges, &c., which
have been translated into English, and published under the title of "The
Phantom World; or, The History and Philosophy of Spirits, Apparitions," kc.
The Rev. Henry Christmas characterizes it as " a vast repertory of legends,
more or less probable, some of which have very little foundation, and some
which Calmet himself would have done well to omit, though now, as a pic-
ture of the belief entertained in that day, tbey greatly add to the value of
the book,"
500 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
have a material body, but that a spirit hath not a body of flesh
and bones, such as he had. 1 Cor. xv. 50, 44, 49 ; Heb. i. 14 ;
ii. 14.
Undoubtedly our Lord's body, at that time, was composed of
real human flesh and bones — the identical flesh and bones com-
posing the body which sufi'ered. To the eye of the disciples
he appeared to be the same person as ever before. We infer
this, because his object was to prove his corporeal identity.
His body, therefore, must have been preserved in its natural
state of flesh and bones, although in other respects it possessed
properties no doubt that it did not before. For example, we
may believe it was no longer passible, or capable of sufi"ering
pain, or of dying. It was also perfectly subject to his infinite
spirit, he having been enlarged from the restraints to which
before death he was subject. Luke xii. 50. It was capable of
being transported at his will, without violence to its nature,
from earth to heaven and from heaven to earth ; although it
was not yet glorified or transformed, through the baptism of
the Holy Spirit, into that glorious nature in which he after-
wards appeared to John and to Paul. Rev. i. 13 — 15 ; Acts
xxii. 6; ix. 3, 4; see note on Matt, xxviii. 9, 10. Our Lord
exhibited his hands and his feet to the disciples for the express
purpose of proving, by the highest possible evidence the disci-
ples could appreciate, that the body in which he then appeared
before them was no phantom, but the very body of flesh and
bones which had been rudely taken from them in the garden,
and conducted to the palace of the high priest, and from thence
to the hall of Pilate, and taken by the soldiers from thence to
Calvary, and by them nailed to the cross. A spirit could not
be felt if it could be seen, nor could it be seen to bear such
marks as those he exhibited. Hence these proofs, added to the
appearance of his whole person, his demeanour, his voice, his
respiration, were full and perfect. They furnished his disci-
ples with as convincing evidence of his corporeal and spiritual
identity as they possibly could have of the presence and iden-
tity of each other.*
* Do we inquire whether the very wounds appeared as freshly made, or
only the scars of them — the wounds themselves having been closed up and
healed ? The Evangelists do not explicitly resolve this question. We know,
however, that such wounds could not have been healed in so short an inter-
val— between Friday afternoon and Sunday evening — by a process of nature
in any other person. The wound in his side was made after he had expired ;
and while the body remained lifeless in the sepulchre, the restorative powers
of his human physical nature ceased. - At his resurrection he could have
restored his body to the state it was in before his crucifixion without leaving
even a mark or scar. Yet why should we suppose he did this ? The miracle
would have weakened the evidence of the identity of his person. When
they last saw that body, (on Friday afternoon) the flesh was cruelly lace-
EVENTS OP THE DAY OF CHRIST'S RESURRECTION. 501
Luke xxiv. 41. "And while they yet believed not for joy
and wonder, he said unto them, Have ye here any meat?"
A moment before they were affrighted, but the brief address
of the Saviour and the exhibition he made of his hands and his
feet to their sight and touch dispelled their fears, and filled
them with unexpected joy. How sudden the transition ! They
knew not what to think. They knew not whether they should
believe or not. They stood between fear and hope. Their
perplexity had passed into wonder. Was what they seemed to
see and hear (for we do not read that any of them had ventured
to touch his person, though invited to do so) possible? Could
they believe their senses? Such a condition of the mind as
we have described is neither impossible nor unnatural.* Ps.
cxxvi. 1.
To remove this new perplexity, the Saviour resorts to another
proof. He called for food, that he might partake of it in their
presence: "Have ye here any meat?" We may read these
words, perhaps, without the question. Ye have here something
to eat. It is supposed he found them reclining at the table at
their evening meal, with their food before them..
Luke xxiv. 42, 43. "And they gave him a piece of
broiled fish, and of an honeycomb, and he took and did eat
before them."
It is not necessary to add to the observations already made
on verse 30. It is sufiicient to say that this proof removed
every doubt, and their minds had become so far tranquillized,
that they could listen with composure to his instructions. Be-
rated. How could such wounds be healed so soon, except by a miracle, and
■what proof had they of such a miracle ? And why should we suppose he
miraculously healed those wounds ? It was not necessary to the restoration
of physical life. He, (the quickening Spirit) by mere occupation, could give
and maintain its life, while allowing the wounds to remain just as they were
when first inflicted. After his glorification we have no reason to suppose
that either wounds or scars appeared upon his person. If we 'may adopt
this suggestion, may we not suppose that the vision of the Lamb slain. Rev.
V. 6, has respect to the appearance of Jesus in heaven before his glorifica-
tion ? See notes on John xx. 17. We add: If the existence of such wounds
seemed inconsistent with physical life, and raised a doubt in the minds of
the eleven, whether after all he was not a spirit or phantom ; the calling
for food, and partaking of it in their presence, and his breathing on them,
■were well calculated, if not designed, to dispel a doubt arising from such a
consideration.
* The Roman historian, Livy, in book 39, chap. 49, informs us that Philo-
poemen, the Achean general, after a battle, contrary to all expectation, re-
mained alive. The enemy found him, and bore him oiF. He describes their
feelings in these words, which are very apposite to our subject: " Vix sibi-
met ipsi prce nee opinato g audio eredenies," " scarcely believing themselves on
account of the unexpected joy."
502 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE. ■
fore proceeding further with this Evangelist, we must turn to the
places in Mark and John which are supposed to refer to the
same appearance of the Saviour.
Mark xvi. 14. "Afterwards he appeared unto the eleven
as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief
and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which
had seen him after he was risen."
This verse is commonly regarded as parallel with the passage
in Luke which we have just considered, and so we have arranged
it in the brief harmony prefixed to these chapters. Erasmus,
hoAvever, in his Paraphrases, postpones this verse till near the
time of our Lord's final visible ascension.*
It is to be observed that Mark does not denote the time with
any degree of definiteness. "Afterward [uarspov) he ap-
peared;" that is, after he appeared to the two disciples as they
were going into the country, he appeared to the eleven as they
sat at meat. Townsend supposes it was eight days afterwards;
that is, on the Sunday following the Sunday on which he rose.
The objection to considering it as referring to the appearance
Luke speaks of, is that neither Luke nor John records anything
as said by the Saviour, which can be considered an uiJhraidiny
of them for their unbelief and hardness of heart. On the con-
trary, his words were full of tenderness. His behaviour and
discourse, as the author just mentioned remarks, were directed
to the composing of their troubles and the satisfying of their
doubts. Accordingly, he assigns the passage to a later period,
when at least a whole week had been allowed the disciples to
examine and compare the proofs of his resurrection, and to call
to mind his own predictions and promises concerning it. Then,
if no more was said by way of reproof than what he said to
Thomas, it was a reprehension of the others, who were in the
same state of mind, and sufficient to justify Mark's expression,
"He upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of
heart," fheaning to include therein other disciples besides the
apostles. Unless we adopt this view, we must understand the
expression of Mark, "upbraided them," {covetocae) as signifying
nothing more than what Luke records of our Lord's language
on the occasion of his first appearance to the eleven, or we
must suppose that both Luke and John have omitted some
expressions which would justify the expression of Mark. It is
a question which cannot be determined with certainty, and it is
* Postremo, jam abiturus in coelum, .apparuit undecim apostolis — nam
Judas perierat — in convivio accumbentihus, quibus exprobravit incredulitatem
et duritiem cordis, quod his qui vidissent ipsum, resurrexisse non credidisseut.
See Erasmi Paraphrases.
EVENTS OF THE DAY OF CHRIST'S RESURRECTION. 503
left to the reader to adopt such view as may seem to him the
most reasonable.*
We turn now to John xx. 19. There can be no doubt that
the appearance recorded in this verse is the same as that
described by Luke, though more briefly, and with some parti-
culars which Luke omits.
John xx. 19. " The same day at evening, being the first
day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples
were assembled, for fear of the Jews, came Jesus, and stood in
the midst and saith unto them. Peace be unto you."
John records four appearances of the Lord, after his resur-
rection: The first was in the morning to Mary Magdalen, when
she was alone at the sepulchre; yet in the next chapter
(verse 14) he speaks of the fourth appearance as the third.
His appearance to Mary was, as has been suggested, for a
special purpose. See notes on verse 17. His appearance to his
male disciples was to qualify them to be witnesses to the world
of his resurrection. Hence it was that while he allowed the
women, at his second appearance, Matt, xxviii., to hold him by
the feet, he did not command them to take hold of his person,
nor give them those varied evidences of his corporeal presence,
he gave his male disciples. Luke xxiv. 39 ; John xx. 20, 27 ; xxi.
For some such reason, we suppose, John took no notice of our
Lord's appearance to the other women, and omits in his nume-
rical series the first appearance to Mary, and mentions as first
in order, the Lord's appearance to his male disciples, recorded
* We have seen that Erasmus postpones this verse till near the time
of our Lord's visible ascension. Beza's remarks on this last chapter of Mark
seem to imply, that the whole of it may be understood of events which oc-
curred on the day of our Lord's resurrection without any violence to the lan-
guage, although he does not make such an application of it. His words are:
" Marcus haec omnia in unum velut corpus conjungit. Deinde exponit quo-
modo eodem die fuerat duobus illis conspectus qui rus ibant. In postrema,
demum parte commemorat quomodo discipulis apparuit, incipiens a, pi'ima.
ilia, apparitione, quae facta est eo ipso die quo resurrexit, quam alite postea
multfR consecutoB sunt. Sed eas omnes rursus in unam velut historiam con-
trahit ; ideoque, postremam hanc apparitionem vocat qusp ab ipso die resur-
rectionis ad ascensionem porrigitur, ut liquet ex versiculo 19. Eandem
prorsus rationem sequitur Lucas postremo capite in quo, ita connectit primam
illam apparitionem cum postremi, ut nisi quis hoc quod dixi consideret, sit
existimaturus, Dominum eo ipse die quo primum apparuit discipulis (id est
quo resurrexerat) in coelum ascendisse, cum dies quadraginta intercesseriut ut
ipsemet refert." These remarks of Beza are more applicable to the last
chapter of Mark than to the last chapter of Luke. The word "afterward,"
iiTTijiov, in the 14th verse of jMark, makes a break in the narrative. We are not
obliged to understand the appearance spoken of by Mark as having been made
on the day on which the Lord arose. But we tiud no such break in Luke's
narrative. The series of the occurrences which he records, down to the 51st
verse inclusively, appear to be immediately consecutive, and compel us to
believe that our Lord ascended into heaven on the evening of the day of his
resurrection. See notes on John xx. 17.
504 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
in tlie verse we are now to consider. Comp. verses 19, 24, 26,
and chap. xxi. 2, 14. It took place on the evening of the
same day he appeared to Mary, being the first day of the week,
and must have been the same appearance which Luke speaks
of, unless we suppose he appeared twice to the apostles on the
same evening, which would be inconsistent with the relation of
Luke, xxiv. '66 — 49. John's account, in fact, is supplementary
to Luke's, and for that reason is more brief. If we compare
the two, we shall be prepared properly to appreciate the diver-
sities almost everywhere discernible in the Gospels, in the nar-
rations of the same events. They are not contradictions nor
discrepancies, because it is not only possible, but easy to weave
all the incidents into one consistent narrative, though it may
not be possible always to determine with certainty the times or
the order of the occurrences. In the passage under considera-
tion, John informs us, that the disciples were assembled with
closed doors, through fear of the Jews. The motive for shutting
the doors suggests that they were also secured by bars, or bolts ;
indeed the word {xey.XztaiJ.evcov) translated shut, implies as much.
See Matt. xxv. 10, 11, Gr. Such a precaution, if it did not
eflfectually secure them from their enemies, would prevent a
sudden intrusion into their company without notice. Hence the
sudden appearance of the Lord Jesus in the midst of them would
naturally cause the fright which Luke so vividly describes ; and
suggest to the imagination that the intruder was not a human
being, but a spirit: for how could he enter, the doors being
shut, if he were a corporeal being? Luke xxiv. 37. This im-
agination suggested, perhaps, the mode or form of proof which
the Lord adopted — "See my hands, my feet; handle me, and
satisfy yourselves that it is I myself, in my very body of flesh
and bones." But Luke had not mentioned in his account of
the crucifixion, the piercing of his side, and he says nothing of
the exhibition of it on this occasion to the disciples. This
omission John supplies, and from his account we infer that
Jesus removed his dress to lay this wound bare to their view —
an action which of itself would tend to dispel their unfounded
apprehension. Luke records the words with which the Lord
accompanied these various actions, and the mixed emotions of
the disciples, fear, joy, wonder! John speaks only of the fact
of his showing them his hands and his side, and of the joy into
which the other emotions subsided. Luke records the heads of
the discourse the Saviour held with his disciples, after their
fears were allayed and their minds composed, verses 44 — 48,
while John speaks only of the mission, on which he declared,
at the conclusion of his discourse, he would send them, and the
powers which should be imparted to them for that purpose, by
EVENTS OF THE DAY OF CHRIST'S RESURRECTION. 505
the Holy Spirit, verses 21 — 23. Luke also records the promise
of the Holy Spirit, but does not mention the symbolical action
of breathing on the apostles, in token of the Spirit's inspiration.
John, it is well known, wrote last of the Evangelists. He sup-
plies many important and interesting incidents which the other
Evangelists omitted. We may regard him as having had that
purpose especially in view, or we may regard him and the other
Evangelists as intending to record a part only, John xx. 30;
xxi. 25, of the memorable sayings and doing of the Lord Jesus,
and of the events that befell him.*
Luke xxiv. 44. "And he said unto them: These are the
words that I spake unto you while I was yet with you, that
all things must be fulfilled which were written in the law of
Moses, and in the prophets, aud in the Psalms concerning me."
Observe the style of this address : The Lord speaks of him-
self as of one ivho urns no longer with them as he had been
before. Comp. Acts ix. 39. He was actually present with them
in his body at that very time, or the exhibition of his hands and
feet and side, and his breathing upon them and talking with
them, was all an illusion. On no other condition could they
handle him and feel his flesh and bones. Certainly he was
locally, personally present with them in the very body which
hung on the cross. In what sense, then, was he no longer with
them? He had ascended to the Father. The earth was no
longer the place of his domicile. His sacrificial work was done ;
his earthly ministry, as a man, was ended; and although incar-
nate and not yet glorified, he was with them, as he was Avith
Abraham in the plain of Mamre, Gen. xviii. 1, or with Manoah.
Judges xiii. He was come to them again from the Father, not
to abide with them ; not to continue with them in social inter-
course in the flesh, but simply to qualify them to be eye-wit-
nesses of his resurrection, f
* Like Xenophon in his work upon Socrates, they record, says a learned
writer, (u5rcjMV«^cva/uaT*) 3Iemurabilia, without pretending to furnish their
readers witii an extended connected record of the whole of his life, or even of
his public life. Hence Matthew and Mark confine themselves chiefly to what
he did in Galilee. Of the rest they speak only summarily. Luke dwells
chiefly upon the Lord's last journey to Jerusalem. See from the ninth chapter
to the end of his Gospel. John gives more of his history in Judea than the
other Evangelists. His Gospel is peculiarly rich in the private instructions
which the Lord gave to his disciples and others who sought him with a friendly
and teachable spirit. See chaps, iii., iv., xiii. to xvii. Neither of the Gospels,
therefore, was intended as a biography or as a journal of his private and public
life, but rather as excerpts or mi.icellnnies selected from his life by each Evan-
gelist independently of the others: the common design of all being to prove
the Divine nature and mission of our blessed Lord, and the object of his incar-
nation and death, so that believing in him we may have life through his name.
John XX 31 ; Acts xiii. 38—41.
f According to Mill, some MSS. add to Acts x. 41, after the word o-uvtricuiv
64
506 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
Observe also the matter of the address: "These are the
words which I spake unto you." What words? Are they the
words which follow to the end of the verse? viz. "that all
things must be fulfilled," &c. This may be the sense. See
Luke xviii. 31; Ps. xxii. 16. But the expression admits of
another sense. " These are the things which I spoke of " — mean-
ing the wounds in his hands and his feet, which perhaps he ex-
hibited to them while pronouncing these words.*
If we may understand the words in this sense, the Lord
referred to his repeated predictions of his sufferings, which per-
plexed them so much, which they could not believe were even
possible. These predictions he began to utter when Peter first
declared, by Divine inspiration, the mystery of his person, which
he repeated to them afterwards frequently in private. f
And now, when they saw them fulfilled, he says, "These are
the things of which I spake," &c., when I said, "that all things
written in the law," &c., concerning me must be fulfilled.
We observe again, that our Lord here recognizes and sanc-
tions the three great divisions of the Jewish Scriptures, the
Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms ; and expressly asserts that
he is the great subject of each of them. Indeed, if they relate
to him at all, the other matters they contain must be of subor-
dinate moment. It seems to us strange that this sense of the
Scriptures, thus exhibited to them, should have escaped the ob-
servation of the whole nation, even of the devout. But it was
not consistent with the Divine plan, that the- nation should un-
derstand clearly before the event, the revelation of a rejected
and suffering Messiah ; for a clear disclosure of the event would
have seemed inconsistent with the proclamation of the kingdom,
and the freeness of the offer of its blessings. Luke xiii. 34;
xix. 41, 42; Matt, xxiii. 37; xxi. 42, 43; iv. 17. Although
these things were revealed, yet to the nation they were a pro-
found mystery ; and hence our Lord, in private, told his disci-
ples of them beforehand, that when they should come to pass
the words ita/ auvia-'rfaLyifoiiv ek t;)V fiK^poo'uviiv h « icu.i o Jncrcu; avi^rx iK vixpuv
Kui i ;t«t/w)
"upon this rock," do not refer to Peter, nor yet simply to Christ himself, but
to the work of the Holy Spirit, who taught Peter the mystery of the person
of the Chi-ist, as God and man. Against the Church which is thus being
formed, the gates of hell, (a/xj) that is, of death, shall not prevail. Although
the members of it have been passing from age to age into the invisible world,
534 NOTES ON SCRIPTUEE.
This view of the commission does not detract from the
dignity and importance of the Christian ministry. It was
appointed for the gathering of the materials out of which the
Lord selects such as he pleases, to be builded into his spiritual
house, and it is honour enough that it is divinely appointed for
any purpose. To change the figure : The dignity and service
to which he called the apostles was to be fishers of men, Luke
V. 10; Mark i. 17; Matt. iv. 19; and the result of their
labours he set forth in the parable of the net cast into the sea.
Matt. xiii. 47—49. See 1 Cor. iii. 12—15.
It results also from what has been said, that baptism is not
a saving ordinance, but a seal of discipleship. In Mark xvi. 16,
it is connected with belief. " He that believeth and is baptized
shall be saved" — language which is applicable only to those
capable of exercising belief in the gospel, and by some it is
restricted to such. The language of Matt, xxviii. 19, however,
is broad enough to include others. The infants of Israel, at
the exodus from Egypt, were baptized in the sea and the cloud,
as well as the adults, 1 Cor. x. 1, 2, and the baptism of John
was appointed for all the people, Luke iii. 21 ; and the teaching
and baptism the Lord appointed were for all nations, and for
all of every nation capable of receiving them. This command,
the apostles would naturally interpret by these national exam-
ples, and if there were a doubt on the question, the analogy of
circumcision would be decisive. Col. ii. 11.
One use of the baptism of infants is to insure their disciple-
ship— if they should live to majority — by uniting them to the
visible Church, thus bringing them within the sphere of the
ordinary operations of the Holy Spirit. If removed by death,
before moral agency, with the seal of the covenant upon them,
we doubt not that they are elect according to the foreknowledge
of God; renewed by the Holy Spirit, aggregated to the Church
of the first born, and will be raised in glory at the second
coming of the Lord.* If they are spared to the age of maturity,
(aJjtc) yet upon the completion of their body, the gates of death shall yield
them up, and they shall appear in visible glory with Christ at their head.
1 John iii. 2. Excommunication may cut off such members from the visible
Church, as it did many at the Reformation from Popery, but it cannot affect
their relations to the invisible Church, nor to Christ their head.
* Those who deny the premillennial advent of Christ and the first, or sepa-
rate and earlier resurrection of the Elect Church, find it impossible to explain
the use of infant baptism in the case of those who die in infancy before they
are capable of moral action ; without maintaining that all unbaptized infants
dying before actual sin are not saved: For if all such, whether baptized or
unbaptized, are raised at the same time to the same glory, what benefit does
baptism confer? And what profit was circumcision to infants in Israel, dying
in infancy with the seal of the covenant upon them, if the uncircumcised male
infants dying in infancy, whether Jew or Gentile, are indiscriminately to be
THE DISCIPLES ENDOWED WITH MIRACULOUS POWERS. 535
their baptism-, without faith, will be of no avail. "For he that
believeth not," being capable of belief, "shall be damned."
Mark xvi. 16.
Mark xvi. 17, 18. "And these signs shall follow them that
believe: in my name they shall cast out devils, they shall speak
with new tongues: they shall take up serpents, and if they
drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them: they shall lay
their hands on the sick and they shall recover."
Assuming, as we do, that these words were uttered on the
occasion of our Lord's appearance in Galilee, when some of the
disciples, who had not seen him before, doubted, they furnished
a sure means of convincing them. These disciples could not
doubt that they saw a person, or that they heard him speak,
nor had they any doubt of what he said. They doubted whether
he who appeared and spoke to them, was Jesus, who had been
crucified. The conferring of such powers upon the apostles —
especially the gift of new tongues on the day of Pentecost, was
a sure proof not only of his resurrection from the dead, but of
his Divine nature. A proof of this kind was quite agreeable to
our Lord's method, John xiv. 29; xiii. 19; xvi. 4, and such we
suppose was One reason of making this prediction or promise.
The Acts of the apostles show how it was fulfilled, Acts xvi.
16 — 18; viii. 7; xix. 15; ii. 4; xxviii. 3; v. 15, 16; iii. 7;
nor can we reasonably question its effect. The events of the
day of Pentecost were marvellous without example, and proved
beyond cavil the living energies of him who predicted them.
Besides removing the doubts of those disciples, the miraculous
endowments here promised and soon afterwards conferred, were
of the utmost importance, as we shall hereafter see, in laying
the foundations of the Church. They aroused and fixed the
attention of Jews and Gentiles. Acts ii. 7, 8; viii. 6, 13;
xiv. 11; xiii. 12; xxviii. 3 — 6. They attested the veracity
and authority of the apostles. As they were exercised in the
name of Jesus, in proof of his resurrection and ascension, they
challenged belief in those facts and obedience to his commands,
and thus contributed to the rapid formation of the visible
Church. Acts ii. 41; iv. 4, 32; vi. 5, 7. But it was not in
their nature to do more. Nor was their long continuance
necessary. For churches being thus formed, and being made
depositaries of the truth, became witnessing communities capable
of attracting the observation of Jews and Gentiles, and of
raised at the same time to the same degree of glory? And what can be the
meaning of God's declaration to Abraham: "The uncircumcised man-ciiild
shall be cut off from his people: He hath broken my covenant?" It cannot
mean he shall die an early natural death: for the case we are considering is
that of a circumcised man-child dying in infancy.
536 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
preaching the gospel for a witness to the people among whom
they were planted.
The next appearance of the Lord was to James, as we learn
from 1 Cor. xv. 7 : but of this we know nothing more than the
fact. The time, the place, the circumstances, are nowhere
recorded. The motive of it was probably personal to that
apostle. The same may be said of the Lord's appearance to
Peter; and for that reason nothing more than the fact in either
case is noted. The only other appearance of which we have a
particular account, is mentioned in Acts i. 4 — 9, to which we
now proceed.
The appearances already spoken of, had fully convinced the
apostles of the reality of the resurrection of their Lord and
Master. The proofs they had of it were many and infallible.
Acts i. 3. They were as fully qualified as men could be, to
bear testimony to the fact; and this final appearance was not
necessary, nor was the especial design of it, to confirm them in
the belief of what they already infallibly knew. But it was
necessary that they should be made eye-witnesses of the Lord's
ascension. Hitherto his departure from them at the close of
each interview, had been as mysterious as his approach. Luke
xxiv. 3L* But now the apostles were assembled to witness
his ascension ; a fact which they were also to preach and testify
to as eye-witnesses. Acts ii. 33, 34. We may add, by these
means they were also prepared to apprehend more vividly the
fulfilment of the promise the Lord made them the night before
he suffered: "It is expedient for you that I go away; for if I
go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you, but if I
depart I will send him unto you." John xvi. 7; xv. 26. They
could not have understood at the time the manner in which this
promise would be fulfilled. John xiii. 36; xiv. 5; xvi. 28. The
event taught them that it was through his death, resurrection,
and ascension — three mysterious steps, if we may so say — the
first two of which had been fully proved to them, and they were
now to be made eye-witnesses of the third, which they would
naturally — we may say inevitably — connect with the visible
descent of the Holy Spirit, whose mission depended on the
ascension of the Lord Jesus to the Father.
For these reasons, in addition to those already given, we do
not regard the account of the ascension, in Acts i. 4 — 9, as
only a more particular statement or narrative of the ascension
mentioned in Luke xxiv. 51, but as a distinct account of a dif-
* What Lube says of the Lord's ascension at Bethany, Luke xxiv. 51, he
■wrote by inspiration. He does not mean to assert in that place, that the
apostles at tliat time saw him carried up into heaven ; for they did not see
•whither he departed, until he left them at his last appearance.
A PARAPHRASE. 537
ferent ascension introductory to the relation he was about to
make of the descent of the Holy Spirit in the next chapter, and
intended especially to show the manner in which the Lord ful-
filled the promises just mentioned. John xiii. 33; xiv. 2, 3;
XV. 26; xvi. 7, 28. His visible ascension, and the visible
descent of the Holy Spirit, were a demonstration to their
senses of the truth and fulfilment of his words. They answered
the questions and doubts of Peter, John xiii. 36: "Whither
goest thou?" "Why cannot I follow thee now?" in a manner
they could not fail to comprehend.*
Thus much premised, we come to the passage, the scope and
general meaning of which may be learned from the following
paraphrase, Acts i. 1: In my first book, Theophilus, I have
related [in part] what Jesus did and taught [during his per-
sonal ministry] among the Jews, Rom. xv. 8, bringing that
history down, verse 2, to [the close of the] day, on which he
[arose from the dead and] ascended [to the Father], having
[first] given his commands, through the Holy Ghost, to [the
apostles he had chosen] [to be his witnesses], verse 3. To
whom he alsof appeared again from heaven at several times
after he suffered, during [the lengthened period of] forty days ;
exhibiting to them many indubitable proofs [that he was the
same Jesus whom they had seen crucified]. At these appear-
ings he spoke to them concerning the kingdom of God [which
they were anxiously expecting and waiting for], verse 4. At
length, after the apostles had returned from Galilee, whither
they went with other disciples, by his express command to see
him, Matt, xxviii. 10, 16 — 20; having assembled them together
[upon Mount Olivet, for the last time], he strictly commanded
them [[Tfj '^(Of)i^s.(liVTi; verse 6,) ask this question concerning the restoration of the kingdom
to Israel, unless it was suggested by the mention of John the Baptist, the
advent or kingdom-preacher? Why should the Ldrd, after he had fully
answered their question, add, verse 8, what the question did not call for, (the
addition being little more than a repetition of what he had already said in
verse 4,) unless it was to assure them that the fulfilment of the Father's pro-
mise was not dependent upon the restoration of the kingdom to Israel, as they
seemed to suppose ? And what connection had the words of the angels with
the sight they explained, or with th,' apostles' views or expectations, unless
it be that suggested in the paraphrase? That there is a consecutive chain of
meaning from verse 4 to verse 11, we cannot doubt. It may not be that sug-
gested, but if not, will the reader endeavour to discover it?
540 NOTES ON SCRIPTUKE.
To this paraphrase we now add a few observations on par-
ticular passages.
Acts i. 3. " Speaking [of the] things concerning the king-
dom of God."
What the Lord taught his apostles on this subject has not
been recorded. It is plain, however, from the question they
put to him, verse 6, that they did not understand him to say
anything inconsistent with the prophecies respecting the king-
dom promised to Israel, or its restoration at that time. The
kingdom of God, of which he spoke, they understood to be the
kingdom which John the Baptist preached, the coming of which
he had represented by various parables, Matt, xiii., all of which
implied some delay in its coming. See notes on Matt. iii. 2, p.
210. We may infer also from Acts x. ; xv. 7 — 17, that the
apostles did not learn from him at that time that the Gentiles
would be sharers therein, Matt. xxii. 1 — 9, although he had
already assured them that repentance and remission of sins
should be preached in his name among all nations. Luke xxiv.
47. Even the inspiration of the Holy Spirit received on the
day of Pentecost did not extend to this mystery, because a
special command was necessary. Acts x. 19, 20, to determine
Peter to go to Cornelius. Indeed the kingdom of God, to a
great extent, is still a mystery, and will remain so, more or
less, until it shall be revealed at the appearing of Jesus Christ.
1 Tim. iv. 1 ; 1 Cor. ii. 9 ; Rev. x. 7 ; 1 John iii. 2; Dan. vii.
13, 14.
Acts i. 4. "And being assembled together with them," &c.
Rather say, "and having convened them."
This meeting was brought about by a special act of the
Saviour's providence, as Avere all the others;* and this con-
sideration, if well founded, enables us to decide in favour of
the common reading. The sense of [(TL)iJa'j?,i^o/isuo^) " dwelling
or lodging with them" is not agreeable to the fact, as we have
seen, and the sense of "eating together with them" seems to
imply that the apostles were not yet fully convinced of the
reality of his resurrection: for it w^as only as a proof of that
fact that the Lord partook of food in their presence at all. It
is plain, however, that after his appearance to Thomas, John
XX. 26, the apostles, without exception, were perfectly con-
vinced of this truth. Besides, the sense we have suggested, is
most agreeable to the Divine nature and dignity of the Saviour,
* See note on Matt, xxviii. 16. Indeed it is remarkable, that from their
first call to the apostleship, until his final departure from them, he exercised
a special care and control over them. Luke xxii. 35 ; Matt. x. 9, 30, com-
pared with John xvii. 12 ; xviii. 8, 9.
John's baptism and ministry. 541
and for that" reason most probably, if not certainly, the sense
of the inspired writer.
Acts i. 5. "For John truly baptized with water, but ye
shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence."
Or thus: John baptized [all the people] with water, [to prepare
them for the kingdom, the advent of which he preached,] but I
will baptize you with the Holy Ghost. Matt. iii. 11 ; Mark i. 8.
It appears to be a part of the Divine plan to introduce every
new dispensation with a preparatory baptism of those who were
or are to enjoy it. The dispensation of law was preceded by
baptism in the cloud and sea. 1 Cor. x. 1, 2. See 1 Peter
iii. 20, 21; 2 Peter ii. 5; iii. 6, 7. That baptism continued,
without any other baptism of the whole people, until John Avas
sent to preach a new dispensation which implied his authority
to baptize. John i. 25. Hence our Lord uses the words "bap-
tism of John" in a sense which includes his function of teaching
and preaching the kingdom. Matt. xxi. 25. It was this asso-
ciation of the rite with the preaching of the impending advent
of Messiah, and of both with the person of John as the ap-
pointed preacher, taken in connection with the contrast the
Lord stated between John as a baptizer with water, and himself
as the baptizer with the Holy Ghost, that suggested to the apos-
tles the inquiry in the next verse.
John's ministry preceded but a little, the appearance of Mes-
siah. In fact, Jesus appeared and began to preach, as soon as
John's public ministry was ended. Matt. iv. 12.
It was, therefore, very natural for the apostles, without set-
ting down anything to the account of Jewish prejudices, to
suppose that their ministry, aided by the promised power, would,
like John's, be brief, and issue immediately in the outward
establishment of the kingdom they so much desired. The in-
spiration of the Holy Spirit by degrees corrected and enlarged
their views. Acts iii. 19—21 ; xv. 13—17, by unfolding to them,
as occasion required, more and more of the Divine purposes.
But with the amount of knowledge they then had, the inquiry
sprung from the habitual association in their minds of baptism
with the kingdom: from their hopes of its near approach,
founded upon the preaching of John, and the promised aid of
Divine power.*
* As John's baptism had respect to the kingdom he preached to the Jews, so
the baptism the apostles were to administer has respect to the kingdom they
•were to preach to all nations. As the purpose of John's ministry and baptism
terminated with the rejection and death of Christ— that is with the withilrawal
of the kingdom from the Jews as a nation, Matt. xxi. 43— so the purpose of
the ministry and baptism committed to the apostles and their successors will
terminate with the resurrection of the elect Church and the second coming of
Christ in that same kingdom which the Jews rejected. Both baptisms had
542 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
Verses 4, 5. ^ These verses, it may be presumed, comprise
all the Saviour intended to say in the first instance to the apos-
tles on this occasion. All he said afterwards, verses 7 and 8,
•was drawn out by their question; and would not have been
said, it may be presumed, if that question had not been put.
Hence, it may be inferred that the object of gathering them at
this time was not to give thern further instructions, nor yet to
confirm them in their belief of the fact of his resurrection, of
■which they were already fully convinced, but to make them wit-
nesses of his final ascension. Verses 4 and 5, it will be observed,
are but a repetition of what he had said before, John xx. 19—23;
Luke xxiv. 49, except that he more strictly enjoined them not
to leave Jerusalem, lest being absent at the moment of the
bestowment of the promised gift, they should fail of the bless-
ing. It is not improbable that for the same reason they abode
from that time together, as we are told they did in verses 13
and 14.
Acts i. 6. " When they therefore w^ere come together, they
asked of him," &c.
The connection of this verse with the preceding is obscured
by the translation. The meaning is, that the persons who had
thus been brought together, that is, the apostles and perhaps
some other disciples, hearing this reference to John and his
baptism, and the promise of the baptism of the Holy Spirit,
therefore asked him, &c. Who composed the company is not
quite clear. They are not designated apostles. The angels
called them "men of Galilee," verse 11, and it is apparent
from the 12th and 13th verses, that the eleven apostles were of
the number : but it is not improbable that other disciples were
present, especially those pious women, see verse 14, who were
last at the cross and first at the sepulchre, on the morning of the
Lord's resurrection. And if it was a part of the apostles' office to
bear witness to the Lord's ascension, it is probable, if not quite
certain, that Joseph called Barsabas, and Matthias were of the
number, verses 21 — 26. We perceive no reason why others,
respect to the coming of one and the same kingdom, and both to an elect people,
but not the same people. The subjects of John's baptism were that generation
of Jews to whom he was sent, but the subjects of Christian baptism are pro-
fessed believers of all nations. The water which John applied was but an em-
blem of the Holy Spirit. The eleraert was continued, but it is still only an em-
blem of that same Divine energy which the Lord, as the architect of his Church,
Matt. xvi. 18, keeps in his own power. The apostles and the ministry which,
instrumentally, they established, apply the element to multitudes, as .John did,
while the Lord baptizes (with the Holy Spirit) those only whom the Father has
given him. John xvii. 2, 9, 12, 20. John's baptism, like that of Moses, was
an ineffectual rite. The event proved it. Such, also, is the baptism committed
to the apostles and the Church when unattended with the Holy Spirit's renew-
ing power. Yet it is a divinely appointed ordinance of inestimable value.
MISCONCEPTION OF THE APOSTLES. 543
as well as the apostles, should not be permitted to witness this
wonderful event. The angels might especially address the
apostles as they did, although others, Galilean men and women,
were present.
Acts I. 6. "Lord, wilt thou at this time restore the hing-
dom to Israeli'
It is not probable that the apostles had an enlarged con-
ception of the kingdom about which they inquired. See notes
on Luke xxiv. 25, 26. Yet they were not mistaken in assuming
that a kingdom had been promised to their people. Isa. i. 26;
Zech. ix. 9; Micah iv. ; Amos ix. 11; Hos. iii. 4, 5. The
idea of theocracy was familiar to them, but it was a theocracy
distinct from and paramount to the government of their kings
and earthly rulers. The blending or consolidation of the
theocracy with the earthly throne and kingdom of David,
at the accession of Messiah, was a mystery they did not under-
stand. This is indeed still the great undeveloped mystery of
the kingdom. The astonishing events they had witnessed had
fully convinced them of a part of this great mystery, the union,
namely, of the Divine with the human nature, in the person of
their Master; but this did not explain to them the profound and
far-reaching mystery of the throne and the kingdom of David,
nor had they any proper conception of the means by which, or
of the dignity and glory to which, it was his purpose to exalt
them. It is probable, therefore, that their conceptions of it
were influenced by, if not formed upon the most prosperous
period in their national history. But their misconception of it,
whatever it may have been, and their low views, are to be
ascribed to ignorance, not to national prejudice. The glories
of the kingdom as well as the times of it, are still unrevealed
secrets, deeply hidden in the mind of God, which his providence
only will disclose. 1 Tim. vi. 14 — 18, See the Jewish
Chronicle for April, 1849, vol. iii. pp. 289, 291.
Acts i. 7. "It is not for you to know the times or the
seasons which the Father has put in his own power."
This clause is better rendered without the article. The
meaning is. It is not for you to know any of the times or
seasons connected in the Divine mind with the purposes of
redemption; for these the Father hath hidden under his
Almighty power.
The restoration of the kingdom to Israel is one of those
purposes. With it are connected others of inconceivable mag-
nitude and glory — the completion of the elect church, or the
church of the first born, the body of Christ — their resurrection
to glory — the second coming of Christ — the destruction of the
man of sin — the binding of Satan — the removal of the curse,
544 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
and the restitution of all things contained in God's covenant
with Abraham.
Bengel, in loco, remarks, that the emphasis is on you, as if
others might know what they might not.*
This may be true in a qualified sense: for the Lord had
already given them, and through them the church, providential
signs of his coming, to be watched for. Luke xxi. 25 — 36;
Mark xiii. 24—37; Matt. xxiv. 29 — 37. But this question
was definite. It called for precise information: Lord, wilt
thou, at this time," &c. It is worthy of remark, that our Lord
always refused to answer such inquiries. See Matt. xxiv.
3, 42; XXV. 13; Mark xiii. 4. 32, 33; Luke xii. 36—46;
xxi. 7, 34. It is plain from the Epistles, that the inspiration
of the apostles afterwards, did not extend to this subject.
1 Thess. V. 2; 2 Thess. ii. 3—8; 2 Pet. iii. 10; Rev. iii. 3;
xvi. 15.
Acts i. 9. "And .... while they beheld he was taken
up, and a cloud received him out of their sight."
The sacred writer describes according to the appearance.
The angels he calls men, because they appeared in the form of
men; and that which concealed the ascending Saviour from
view, he calls a cloud, for such it appeared to be. We should
err, however, if we conceived of it as a natural cloud of vapour,
through which the Lord passed. At his transfiguration a cloud
appeared, out of which a heavenly voice issued. Luke ix. 34, 35;
Mark ix. 7 ; Matt. xvii. 5 ; 2 Pet. i. 17. See also, Exod. xiv. 19 ;
xvi. 10; xxiv. 15, 16; xxxiv. 5; xl. 38; 1 Kings viii. 10; Isa.
iv. 5, which we are accustomed to regard as supernatural, and
so we regard this. The ascension was an act of Divine power,
and why may not all its attendant circumstances be ascribed to
the same cause?
Acts i. 12. "Then returned they [from the place where
they Avitnessed the ascension] unto Jerusalem [namely] from
the Mount called Olivet, which is from Jerusalem a Sabbath-
day's journey."
Upon the hypothesis that our Lord first ascended to heaven
on the fortieth day after his resurrection, it is difficult to
reconcile this verse with Luke xxiv. 50, 51. See notes on those
verses. Some have imagined there were two places called
Bethany ; but if this were so, some of the Evangelists unques-
tionably would have mentioned the fact. See Matt. xxi. 17;
xxvi. 6; Mark xi. 1, 11, 12; xiv. 3; Luke xix. 29; xxiv. 50;
* Non dicit non est vestrum sed non ve.itrum est ... . Non dicit non est juris
et officii vextn quoerere. sed ait non vestrum est nosse. Revelatio oeconomiffi
divime liabet suos gradus.
THE PLACE OF THE LOBD'S ASCENSION. 545
John xl. 1; "xii. 1. Reland rejects the supposition. All the
itineraries, according to that author, show but one Bethany,
and that at the foot of the Mount of Olives, on the east.
Others suppose that tradition only fixes the summit of the
Mount as the place of ascension ; but such a tradition naturally,
not to say inevitably, would arise from this verse, and should
therefore be regarded as the early and contemporaneous expo-
sition of the text, and for that reason more likely to be accord-
ing to the truth than any different one which modern criticism
can suggest.* The difficulty disappears, if we admit several
ascensions — a supposition quite consonant with the Divine
power and majesty of the Saviour. See notes on John xx. 17.
And why should the sacred writer mention Mount Olivet at
all, and especially the distance of a particular summit or part
of it from the city, if he had it in his mind to signify that they
returned from Bethany? This would be to go out of his way
in order to make a geographical note not called for by his
subject; and at the same time, an omission of the chief thing
he intended to say. The language he employed in his Gospel,
xxiv. 50, 52, would have expressed his meaning clearly and
fully. It is true, if they returned from Bethany by the nearest
way, they returned along that part of the Mount which was
opposite to the city, and when they reached the summit they
were a Sabbath-day's journey from the city. But this he does
not say. He says simply they returned from the Mount of
Olives, without mention of any other place, and from the
necessity of the case, we may say, they returned from the place
of ascension. Hence the inference seems necessary, that the
place from which he finally ascended was that part of the
Mount of Olives which was a Sabbath-day's journey, about
2,000 cubits, or one thousand yards from the city. No doubt
would have arisen on this question were it not for Luke xxiv.
50, 51, which applies, as we think it has been shown, to a
different ascension. It may be added, that Zechariah, in pro-
phesying of the Lord's return. Acts i. 11, designates the Mount
of Olives as the place where his feet shall stand, xiv. 4, and
Ezekiel, xi. 23, denotes that mountain as the place upon which
the glory of the Lord rested. f
* Bernard Lamy resolves the difficulty in this way, which he considers easy
and satisfactory: "Non in ipsa Bethania sed in via, qua Dominus se recipere
solebat in Bethaniam, ascendit in caelum; scilicet, eduxerat discipulos foras
extra Hierosolyma, quasi more suo vellet ire in Bethaniam. In itinere autem
antequam hue perveniret assumptus est." But the words of Luke, xxiv. 50,
are: He led them out (s^ ik Buflawav) as far as to Bethany, which do not admit
such an interpretation.
f Josephus mentions the Mount of Olives in Antiquities, books vii. 8 ; ix. 11 ;
XX. 6; Jewish War vi. 3. It is referred to under difl'erent de.^iguatious in
69
546 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
Acts i. 13, 14. "And when they were come in" — after they
had come into the city — "they went up into [the] upper room —
where abode Peter, and James, and John, and Andrew, Philip,
and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew, James the son of Al-
pheus, and Simon Zelotes, and Judas the brother of James.
These all continued with one accord in prayer and supplication,
with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his
brethren."
From the place of the ascension, these persons returned im-
mediately to the upper apartment the apostles had, probably,
previously occupied. The definiteness of the language justifies
the supposition that some particular places were in the mind of
the writer. Setting out from Mount Olivet, they returned, by
a short walk, immediately to the city, and entering it, they pro-
ceeded together to the upper apartment, in the occupation and
under the control of the apostles. Upon entering it, they en-
gaged in prayer, and continued to do so daily, in expectation of
the fulfilment of the Father's promise. Other disciples also
took part in these daily exercises ; among whom were certain
women, of whom only one is mentioned by name — Mary the
mother of Jesus, and his nearest kinsmen.
Nothing compels us to believe that all these disciples dwelt
togeljher under the same roof, but only the apostles, who were
probably influenced to do so by the supposed connection between
the Saviour's command to keep within the walls of the city, and
his promise to baptize them with the Holy Spirit. Nor need
we suppose they did not leave the apartment, or visit the
temple daily : for this would contradict Luke xxiv. 52. The
command was merely not to depart from the city, ano "hpoaoX-
upcop p-fj y^coptC,s.odae. It was enough that they should be found
together in one place, and so they were daily at the appointed
hours for prayer. May we not believe that at such a meeting
the Holy Spirit descended upon them? Acts ii. 1; see iv. 31.
But to whom did they address their prayers? The events of
which they had been eye-witnesses, left no doubt in their minds
of the Divine nature of their Master. They knew him to be
omniscient, as well as all-powerful, and to him they prayed.
This is apparent from verse 24, which contains the only notice
1 Kings xi. 7; Mark xiii. 3. The Jews sometimes called it the Mount of Unc-
tion, and they have a tradition that the Shekina, see Buxtorf s Chald. Rabb.
and Talmud. Lex. ad voc, dwelt three years and a half on that mountain to
see whether the people would return to God — calling out to them, "Return to
me, my sons, and I will return to you" — but as they remained impenitent the
Shekina returned to his own place. The mountain has tliree summits : the
northern is the highest, and is distant two stadia or furlongs from that opposite
to the city. The southern summit is called the Mount of Offence. The inter-
mediate is that of the Ascension. See Reland's Palestine.
IIEASONS FOR THE EVENTS OF THE DAY OF PENTECOST. 547
•we have of t'he prayers they offered during this short interval.
Their faith in this essential fact, then, preceded their inspiration
by the Holy Spirit, and this removes one of the chief argu-
ments of those who would fritter doAvn the confession of Thomas
into a mere exclamation. John xx. 28.
It is a notable circumstance that Mary the mother of our
Lord is not mentioned in the New Testament, after this place,
and that the other female disciples, whose names so frequently
occur in the Gospels, are here alluded to only in general terms,
and not afterwards — a confirmatory proof of what is sufficiently
apparent from other places, 1 Tim. ii. 12; 1 Cor. xi., that the
active public ministry of the gospel was not committed unto
them. This may well be allowed, without detracting in the
least from their importance and eminent usefulness in the
Church.
We have now reviewed all the passages respecting our Lord's
appearances to his apostles and disciples after his resurrection.
To them these appearances established the fact, beyond the
possibility of doubt, and thus qualified them to be witnesses of
it to the world. But would the world receive the fact on their
assurance, whatever proofs they might give of their sincerity?
Would it be reasonable to expect it? More than this: would
it be consistent with the equity of the Divine government to
demand belief of facts so wonderful, upon mere human testi-
mony? Even the Lord himself appealed to his works in con-
firmation of his words. John v. 36; x. 25; xv. 24. Admitting
the sincerity of the apostles, they were ignorant and unlearned
men, and it would be much safer to believe they were deceived,
than to receive upon their assurance as true, events so incredi-
ble. So the world would reason. Add to this : the matters to
which the apostles were to testify concerned the religious faith
of the people, of which they were tenacious beyond example.
How could they who had rejected and put to death the Master,
notwithstanding his miracles, be expected to receive, with the
obedience of faith, the unconfirmed testimony of his unlettered
servants? His death was public, and extremely ignominious.
None but his disciples ever saw him after his resurrection. The
popular belief was, he had not risen at all. The rulers and
priests asserted that his disciples had stolen and concealed his
dead body, to give support to imposture. See notes on Matt,
xxviii. 13. Under such circumstances, their verbal testimony
would be regarded as the testimony of disappointed men, and
unworthy of belief even by the vulgar. Why, it would be in-
quired, if he really rose from the dead, did he not publicly ap-
pear, as he did before, in the temple and before the assemblies
of the people, that all might see him and judge for themselves
548 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
of the reality of the fact? These and such questions suggest,
as we suppose, some of the reasons of the events of the day of
Pentecost, and of the extraordinary powers which were then
conferred upon the apostles. Formally stated: The leading
design of the gifts of the Holy Spirit at that time bestowed
upon the apostles, appears to have been, (1.) To establish and
confirm the truth of their testimony, as witnesses of the resur-
rection and ascension of Jesus. (2.) To prove to the apostles
themselves, as well as to others, that the Spirit of Truth, John
xvi. 13, the Comforter, xvi. 7, had really come, in fulfilment of
the Saviour's promise, and dwelt in them and acted by them.
No doubt these gifts were subservient to other uses, some of
which have been already briefly alluded to. See note on Mark
xvi. 17, 18. They excited and fixed the attention of all of
every rank, nation, and religion. They enabled the apostles
to control and authoritatively to govern their numerous con-
verts, and organize them into churches, and appoint over them
rulers and teachers. They also attested the truth and author-
ity of their writings. But these are topics which do not come
within the scope of these notes. Incidentally some of them
may be noticed. The first two, however, belong to the order
of proofs under consideration, and in discussing them it will be
necessary to examine with particular attention the miracles the
apostles wrought, and the arguments they founded thereon to
prove the Messiahship of the Lord Jesus, and consequently his
resurrection from the dead, his ascension to heaven, and his
future coming in his kingdom.
CHAPTER XV.
CHRIST S GLORIFICATION.
The Day of Pentecost. — Peter's discourse. — Peter's argument. — The miracles
that were wrought. — Tlie elect church. — The miracle of healing. — The times
of refreshing. — The dill'erent dispensations. — The restitution of all things.
Acts ii. — The glorification of the crucified body of the Lord
Jesus was an event fraught with the profoundest instruction to
angels, as well as to men. Eph. i. 20, 21; iii. 10; Col. i. 18;
Heb. i. 6; 1 Pet. i. 12. It was his installation at the right
hand of power. Acts ii. 33. The sending down of the Holy
Spirit was dependent on this event, John vii. 39, which, as we
conceive, occurred simultaneously with his glorification. Then
he was completely and for ever enlarged from the restraints he
subjected himself to, by his incarnation, and then it was he
Christ's glorification. 549
resumed the glory he had with the Father before the worhl was.
Col. ii. 6 — 11 ; John xvii. 5; Heb. v. 5. His body was then bap-
tized with the baptism he had desired, Luke xii. 4*J, 50, and
the members of his mystical body on earth — adopting the inspired
imagery of the apostle, 1 Cor. vi. 15; Rom. xii. 5; 1 Cor. xii.
27; Eph. i. 22, 23; iv. 12, 13; Col. i. 24; John xvii. 21—23
— at the same moment shared, though in much smaller
measure, in the Divine unction. Ps. cxxxiii. 2.
It w^as to his glorification then, as we suppose, the Lord
referred, by the words in Luke xii. 50. As this interpretation
of the passage is at variance with the common application of it,
the reader may desire to know the reasons on which it is
founded. It is also important to explain them, in order to cast a
clearer light upon what may be called the great epoch in the
world of redemption. The words are, " I have a baptism to be
baptized with, and (ttco^ aupe^ofjta:) how am I straitened till it
be [tzhadrj) accomplished." It is commonly supposed that our
Lord referred by this expression exclusively to his sufferings
on the cross, and there can be no doubt that they were at that
moment vividly presented to his mind. They lay in the
appointed way to the enlargement he desired, consequent upon
the exaltation of his human person to glory and power, and
the resumption of the glory he had laid aside. The word
{ziXzad^rj) translated " accomplished," is of cognate origin with
the word zshioco which occurs several times in the Epistle to
the Hebrews, and is commonly rendered "made perfect." ii. 10;
V. 9; vii. 19—28; ix. 9; x. 1, 14; xi. 40; xii. 23. This
word (rs/le^ow,) when applied to the Lord Jesus uniformly de-
notes his exaltation to glory. See Scldeusner s Lex. Nov. Test.
ad voc. Tsketoco, and Stuart on Heb. ii. 10, and the other places
cited. So here*: this word [rehodrj) being joined with
{j^o.7iTca[xa) baptism, also denotes the glorification of his human
person. Until it, that is his glorification, should be accom-
plished he could not, consistently with the Divine purpose, put
* The joining of a word of the same origin, and so similar in signification,
see Scapula ad voc. Ttxof, with the word bajitiivi (ji^Tmcr/u-/.) is in itself an argu-
ment of some weight. If we add, that in Hebrews ii. 10; v. 8, 9, the word
(TiKiiiU)) understood in the sense of (/lorificntion, is used in connection with the
appointed means through which (/w ■rcahity.i.'vmyi) his state of giorificatidu was
attained, the argument is considerably enforced : ami finally, if we duly con-
sider that there was a logical necessity for the interchange of the verbs arising
from the nature of the different subjects of which they are predicated, and
also the evident parallelism which exists between this passage and tliose last
cited from the Epistle to the Hebrews, we shall find sufficient reasons to admit
the interpretation suggested. We may add that the baptism of the believer,
by the Holy Spirit, is the beginning of a work or process which ends in his
glorification, and in this sense his baptism is not accomplished Qterfected) until
his glorification. See Rom. viii. 29, 30.
650 NOTES ON SCRIPTUKE.
forth his almighty energies. See Matt. xxvi. 53, 54; Deut.
xviii. 18; John v. 19—30; viii. 28; ix. 4; xii. 49; xiv. 10.
He could not send down the Holy Spirit he had promised.
John vii. 39 ; xvi. 7. Till then, he would retain the form of a
servant, Philip, ii. 7, and consequently be straitened or con-
fined to such acts of power and grace as had been appointed to
him to perform in that subject condition.*
This interpretation discloses the latent thought which con-
nects this verse, Luke xii. 50, with the preceding (49th) verse,
and the three following: " I am come to send fire on the earth,
and what will I — (desire I more) — if it be already kindled?"
The language is highly figurative. It expresses intense desire,
and what so desirable to him in his human character, as his
glorification ? Heb. xii. 2. Under the" emblem of fire he
alluded to the descent of the Holy Spirit at the Pentecost,
which was then first kindled, and from that day forward was
sent broad-cast into the earth. The strife between the powers
of the Saviour, which he then began to put forth through the
Holy Spirit, and the powers of darkness, was then com-
menced. Acts ii. 13, which was to result in the separation of
the children of the kingdom from fleshly alliances, Matt. x.
34 — 39 ; Luke xii. 51 — 53, and prepare them as an elect
people to receive God's king of Zion at his second coming.f
* The word (o-uv6;^;//cu) straitened, is very energetic. This we perceive
when we reflect who spoke it. It signifies to be shut up or kept in constraint,
as in a narrow passage — to be bound, held fast, shackled. See notes on Luke
xxiv. 38 — 40. The LXX. employ it in some places, to translate '-i;^^ {atsar,
see Trommius. ) It is worthy of remark also, that the Jews apply the word
(nilZS) atsereth, in the sense of restraining or shutting up, to the seven
weeks between the Passover and the Pentecost; probably because the joy
of the harvest was at that time restrained. See Brown's Antiquities of the Jews,
vol. i. p. 480. Also Numb. xvi. 48; Job xxix. 9; 1 Chron. xxi. 22;" Heb. text
and Gussetius Com. Ling. Heb. and Schindler Lex. Pentaglot. ad voc. for
the use of this word. It is not improbable our Lord had respect to this
customary use of the word in the Jewish Calendar, and the enlargement he
should receive at the close of it, by the baptism of his body by the Holy
Spirit.
f It may be supposed that Matt. xx. 22, 23, and Mark x. 39, are incon-
sistent with this interpretation, but on the contrary, if rightly explained, they
confirm it. In these verses, the idea of deep affliction is expressed by the
words, " drink of my cup;" an expression which allows, if it does not require,
us to understand the phrase, " be baptized with the baptism with which I am
baptized," of glorification. The sense, as we conceive, is expressed by the
following paraphrase: "Ye shall indeed drink of my cup" of sorrows. Matt,
xxvi. 39; "and be baptized with my baptism," by which at first your souls
shall be renewed and sanctified, and- your bodies shall ultimately be glori-
fied, and made like my own glorious body. Philip, iii. 21 ; 1 John iii. 2 ;
Rom. viii. 29. A glory and a blessedness so great should satisfy you. " But
to sit on my right hand and my left," enjoying the first places in my king-
CHRIST'S GLORIFICATION. 551
The common belief is that the Lord was glorified immediately
on his ascension, and it is founded perhaps upon the supposed
incongruity, or unfitness, of his appearing in heaven in his
unglorified human form. Hence, perhaps, one reason for post-
poning his first ascension till the fortieth day after his resur-
rection. We have, however, endeavoured to show that the Lord
ascended on the morning of his resurrection, and afterwards
repeatedly during this period. See notes on John xx. 17;
Luke xxiv. 50, 51; and Horsley, Ser7nons on the Resurrection.
And why should it be thought incredible that the man Clirist
Jesus should thus appear in the presence of the Father, as the
first Adam might have done, had he continued sinless ? Can
we be sure that there was no purpose in the plan of redemption
which he was required to accomplish within the veil, that is, in
the upper sanctuary, before his glorification? Why was not
the Holy Spirit given immediately upon his last (visible) ascen-
sion? Was this gift bestowed in answer to his intercession
after his ascension, first upon himself, as the head and first-
born of the new creation, without measure — in all the fulness
of the Divine power ; and at the same time in such measure as
needful upon his members ? See Heb. vii. 25. We can neither
affirm nor deny. These things are not revealed.*
In the absence, then, of any more explicit declaration of
Scripture, the foregoing observations render it at least probable
that the glorification of the Lord Jesus was the great event of
dom, "is not mine to give except to those for whom it has been prepared
of my Father."
The common interpretation of this passage makes the Saviour's answer
tautological. For the idea of suffering is tivice expressed, thereby divesting
it of any promise of good whatever. The interpretation suggested finds in
it an esceediugly great and glorious promise, in which all his faithful apos-
tles had an equal share. Besides, neither James nor John suffered death by
crucifixion. James was put to death by the sword. Acts xii. 2. John died, it
is supposed, a natural death, at a very advanced age, after having suffered
severe persecutions. We may regard these events as the fulfilment of the
prediction that they should "drink of his cup." The Saviour certainly did
not intend to say that they should suffer death on the cross. Again, how
consistent the interpretation above suggested is with the gracious char-
acter of the Saviour. He assured those ignorant and ambitious, though loving
and beloved disciples, of glory and happiness inconceivably great, which
they should enjoy in common with their fellow-disciples, yet not the pre-
eminence in his kingdom— the thing which they asked. See Matt, xviii.
2, 3; Luke xxii. 24 — 30; John xiii. 13 — 17. The next verse, Matt. xx. 24;
Mark x. 41, shows how little the other ten entered into the spirit of the
Lord's answer.
* It is worthy of observation that our Lord was transfigured on the holy
mount ^vhile he was in the act of prayer, Luke ix. 29; and in his final inter-
cession he prayed to the Father for glorification. John xvii. 6. See Luke
iii. 21. The glorification of his manhood, and of his elect people, consti-
tuting together one body, were alike the purchase of his death and inter-
cession.
552 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
the day of Pentecost, and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on
the apostles was an outward manifestation of greater things
then done in heaven. By considering these events as simulta-
neous, we enter more fully into the doctrine of the oneness of
Christ, (the head) with his members (his body) and are enabled
to conceive more adequately of the manner and glory of its
origin. These observations premised, we proceed to
Acts ii. 1. "And when the day of Pentecost was fully
come, they were all with one accord in one place."
The feast of Pentecost (r^^c TTevTSxaarr^i;') occurred on the
fiftieth day after the Passover. The Jews observed it in com-
memoration of the giving of the law, on the fiftieth day after
the exodus of Israel from Egypt, when that people put them-
selves under the leadership of Moses, and the patriarchal
economy, as to them, ceased. They call it, also the feast of
weeks, because it fell on the last day of the seventh week after
the day of the Passover. They call it also the feast of first
fruits, because on that day they ofi"ered to God the first fruits
of the wheat harvest. As this feast was instituted immediately
after the giving of the law, it has always been regarded as a
public attestation of that great event. Exod. xxxiv. 22 ; Levit.
xxiii. 15, 16. We observe, also, that as the patriarchal dispen-
sation ceased fifty days before Israel came into new covenant
relations with Jehovah at the foot of Mount Sinai, so the
Levitical economy ceased fifty days before the economy of the
Spirit was inaugurated. The meaning of these short pauses in
the march of the Divine administrations, the Scriptures do not
explain. We doubt not that both are typical in their nature,
the former of the latter, and the latter of something yet
future ; although, by many interpreters, the latter is regarded
merely as the period allotted for proving to the apostles and
disciples the reality of the Lord's resurrection. Besides, this
view of it does not extend to the whole of this period, but
leaves a portion of it — the interval between the Lord's visible
ascension and the day of Pentecost — unexplained.
How many of the disciples were gathered together, and at
what place within the city, we are not informed. Beza inclines
to follow the reading of two ancient MSS., which limits the
number to the apostles, who alone, at the first outpouring,
received the miraculous gifts of the Spirit, and to whom it had
been especially promised. John xvi. 7 — 13. The place, it is
probable, was (not the temple, else probably it would have
been mentioned, but) some private dwelling, where they had
been accustomed to assemble.
Acts ii. 2, 3, 4. " And suddenly there came a sound from
heaven as ot a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house
THE DAY OF PENTECOST. 553
where tliey were sitting : and there appeared unto them cloven
tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them : And
they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak
with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance."
This was the outward visible fulfilment of the Saviour's pro-
mise at the last interview with the Twelve before he suffered.
See notes on Mark xvi. 17, 18. As before suggested, it was
the effect of an act performed in the Upper Sanctuary, within
the veil, far more glorious in heaven than on earth — a greater
wonder to the heavenly hosts than to the inhabitants of Jeru-
salem. These demonstrations of the Divine power and presence
could not fail to remove every doubt, if any remained, upon the
minds of those disciples, who either received or witnessed the
bestowment of this gift. They were designed, also, as a sign to
others, and had the effect of arresting and fixing their attention,
as we learn from the following verses. See 1 Cor. xiv. 22.
The power to speak in other tongues, never learned or heard,
suddenly imparted to illiterate men, was a great miracle, alto-
gether new in its kind, and utterly inexplicable, except by the
inspiration of the Holy Ghost, verse 4,
Upon the apostles themselves, the first effect of the Spirit
was no doubt regenerative. Luke xxii. 32; Matt, xviii. 3.
Hitherto the Saviour had kept them by his special providence
and care. John xvii. 12; xviii. 8, 9; Luke xxii. 35. Now he
handed them over, so to speak, to the power and guidance of
the Holy Spirit, John xvi. 13, who commenced his work by
renewing their souls, and transforming them into eminently
holy, although not perfect men. He inspired them with new
courage, enlightened their minds and enlarged their views, by
removing the veil which hitherto had bounded their mental
vision. A suffering Messiah was no longer a stumbling-block,
but the only Messiah who could fulfil the predictions of the
prophets. These effects we shall see exemplified as we proceed.
But before we leave this passage, we should add that this first
outpouring of the Holy Spirit was the fulfilment, in part, of
the promise recorded in Mark xvi. 17, 18. If we compare this
passage with John xiv. 16, and 1 Cor. xii. 4 — 11, we learn
that the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in believers would be
made manifest in two ways, (1) by his converting power, and
(2) by miraculous gifts, or powers; such as those of speaking
new tongues, healing the sick, casting out demons, and other
diversities of gifts, or of operations of the same gift. All these
operations, the regenerative as much as the rest, are in truth
equally miraculous, being the effect of Divine power exerted
according to the Divine will, in a manner removed from human
power and scrutiny. Yet, there is this difference between
70
654 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
them : in his converting power, the Holy Spirit was promised
to abide in the Church for ev.er; that is, until the last born of
God's elect shall be born again, and the Lord himself shall
return to gather the whole body unto himself. But the out-
wardly manifested miraculous endowments of the Spirit were
designed especially to qualify the apostles and their fellow-
labourers for laying the foundations of the Church, and rapidly
extending it throughout the world. These, as before remarked,
see notes on Mark xvi, 17, 18, were not designed, as some have
supposed, to be perpetual in the Church; and the withdrawal
or cessation of those powers is not an evidence of the want of
faith in those who are truly Christ's, but a part of the plan of
the dispensation under which we live. See notes on John xx. 29.
The effect which the visible descent of the Spirit produced on
the devout Jews at Jerusalem, is narrated in verses 7 — 12. The
varieties of people, of their origin, and of the languages they
spoke, give us a better idea of the confluence of strangers at
that city, especially at the season of festivals, than we can
obtain from any other passage. These persons, being Jews by
descent or proselytes, but foreigners by birth, could appreciate
the greatness of the sign, while others, probably natives of
Judea, not understanding the languages spoken, regarded them
as jargon, and the effect of drunkenness, verse 13.
Acts ii. 14 — 36. But Peter standing up with the eleven,
repelled the calumny. He declared that this wonderful display
was the outpouring of the Spirit predicted by the prophet Joel,
chap. ii. 28 — 32, whom he quoted at length, and then proceeded
to apply it as a proof of the Divine mission of Jesus of Nazareth,
and of his resurrection from the dead, and, verse 38, exaltation
to glory. He asserted that it was his act: "He hath shed forth
this which ye now see and hear." In the course of his address
he quotes Ps. xvi. 8, in proof of the resurrection of Christ, to
which he adds the personal testimony of the apostles, who had
received this wonderful gift of speaking foreign tongues. Such
is the summary of the ap'ostle's argument. We add a few
observations upon some of the particulars.
(1.) He uses the event he was speaking of, as a proof of the
resurrection. " This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all
are witnesses," verse 32, .and he confirms the testimony by this
obvious consideration ; that the wonderful gift they had thus
suddenly received, could be bestowed only by God, leaving it to
be inferred by his hearers, that God would not bestow it to con-
firm their testimony if it were false. The argument is not
only logical but conclusive. It is impossible that God should
sanction or attest a falsehood by a miraculous display of his
power, such as they witnessed. It wull be instructive to notice
Peter's discourse. 555
particularly the manner in which he confirms the personal testi-
mony of the apostles by the Scriptures, verses 25 — 31. "For
David speaking concerning him (Jesus of Nazareth) said, I
foresaw the Lord always before my face ; for he is on my right
hand that I should not be moved. Therefore did my heart
rejoice and my tongue was glad. Moreover also, my flesh shall
rest in hope, because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell" — leave
me in the grave (or d-drji;, the invisible world) — " neither wilt
thou suifer thine Holy One to see corruption. Thou hast made
known to me the ways of life (John xiv. 6): thou shalt make
me full of joy with thy countenance." This quotation from
Ps. xvi. 8 — 11, the apostle avers was spoken of the resurrec-
tion of Christ — that he, viz. his human person, should not be
left in (hades) the grave — that is, his body should not be left in
the grave, nor his soul and spirit in the ivorld of spirits — and
that his body should not be permitted to see corruption. ^ This
sense, however, does not clearly appear from the passage itself,
nor have we reason to suppose it was so understood by the
learned of the nation. To deduce it from the passage, the
apostle collates with it Ps. cxxxii. 11, and Ps. ex. 1, and pro-
ceeds to argue thus from the facts of the case. 'David has
long been dead and buried. His sepulchre remains among
us until this day. His body has seen corruption. Therefore,
although these words of David were apparently spoken of
himself, that is not their meaning : for in that sense they are
not true. Yet David was a prophet, and he spoke these words
by inspiration of the Holy Ghost, and we must therefore
understand them as spoken of another.'
But of whom ? To settle this question the apostle turns his
hearers to Ps. cxxxii. 11, and then proceeds: David remembered
God's promise to him — confirmed by oath — "that of thefruit
of his loins according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to
sit upon his throne." This promise, then, was to be fulfilled in
Christ ; and, the Holy Ghost foreseeing that Christ would be
rejected and put to death by his people, it included not merely
the birth of Christ from one of David's descent, but his resur-
rection from the dead. And to him these words do apply ; for
he was not left in the grave, nor did his body see corruption,
but God raised him up from the dead on the third day after he
had sufi"ered by your hands, and we, his apostles, are eye-wit-
nesses of that fact which we now declare to you. And not only
hath God raised him from the dead, but he has exalted him
according to another Psalm (ex. 1,) in which David says, " The
Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, until I
make thy foes thy footstool." This Psalm also plainly is not
applicable to David, Matt. xxii. 42—45: for David has not
556 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
ascended into heaven, but Jesus of Nazareth has ascended, of
which also we were eye-witnessea; and having ascended he
received of God the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, which
he promised before his ascension to send upon us, which promise
he has this day fulfilled, as you now see and hear, verse 36.
Therefore, let all the house of Israel know for a certainty, that
God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye lately rejected and
crucified as a malefactor, both Lord and Christ.
The grounds of the argument then are these. The visible
outpouring of the Holy Spirit, and the miraculous powers he
had conferred, were predicted by the prophet Joel, and they
were a proof of the ascension of Jesus of Nazareth, whom they
had wickedly put to death. This prophet, therefore, had respect
in this prophecy to the ascension of Christ. His ascension
implied his resurrection from the dead, and this fact had been
foretold by David ; and these facts they, the apostles, who had
received these wonderful powers, were eye-witnesses of: so that
both these prophecies were confirmed— ^the first by what they
saw and heard, and the second by the positive testimony of the
apostles, whose testimony was also confirmed by the miraculous
power of being able to speak 'perfectly many different languages
they had never learned, as though they were their vernacular
tongue. The greatness of this miracle will be best appreciated
by those who have attempted to acquire the ability to speak a
single foreign language with propriety and fluency — a task which
is seldom accomplished after attaining the age of maturity, even
by the most gifted.
The argument, as a whole, is perfectly conclusive ; yet it
must be confessed, that without the explanation of the apostles,
and their testimony as witnesses to the facts he alleged, we
should not be able to find in these passages a prediction of the
resurrection and exaltation of Christ. The same may be said
of Ps. ii. 7, cited by the apostle Paul for the same purpose. Acts
xiii. 33; see Heb. i. 5: "Thou art my son, this day have I
begotten thee," And these, it may be presumed, are among
the clearest prophecies relating to the subject. The obscurity
was designed, lest too luminous a disclosure of the foreseen
rejection of Christ by the nation, and of God's intended pro-
ceedings thereon, should interfere with the freedom of the Jews
to receive their Messiah and enjoy the blessings of the kingdom
he preached. Suppose for a moment that the rejection, cruci-
fixion, resurrection, ascension, and the second coming of Christ,
or either of them, had been clearly foretold in the Old Testa-
ment— the reader will perceive the influence it would have had
on that people during our Lord's personal ministry. Had it
been a part of the national faith, that, by the determinate
CHANGE WROUGHT IN THE MIND OP PETER. 557
counsel and foreknowledge of God, they were to reject their
Messiah, and wickedly put him to death, the people might have
said, " It is in vain to preach the kingdom to us, or expect U3
to receive either the kingdom or the king." Or if not this, the
unbelief of the nation would in some way have perverted the
knowledge of these events into a stone of stumbling and an
additional occasion of ruin. But the purpose of God required
that the nation should be free in their action — free to receive,
and free to reject: because they were to be held responsible
for their conduct. This is a sufficient reason why the greatest
of their national sins and the consequences of it should not be
explicitly foretold.
Before we leave this passage we should remark the great
change wrought in the mind of this apostle by the Holy Spirit.
A large volume of Divine knowledge in the mystery of redemp-
tion had been, as it were in a moment, poured into his soul.
He had become a new man in knowledge. To him it was
another sensible fulfilment of his Saviour's promise. John
xiv. 26; xvi. 13; see 1 John ii. 24 — 27. During the personal
ministry of the Lord he was scandalized at the prediction of
his approaching sufferings. Matt. xvi. 22. He could not
imagine what the rising of the Son of Man from the dead
could mean. Mark ix. 10. On the morning of the resurrection
he understood not the Scripture that he must rise from the
dead, as he now explained it ; see notes on John xx. 9 ; nor had
he any conception of the Lord's ascension. John xiii. 36. But
now, these deep and far-reaching mysteries — obscurely taught
in the Old Testament, as we have seen — were opened. He
understood the Divine purposes that Christ must suffer. Acts
ii. 23; Luke xxiv. 26; Acts xxvi. 23; and why it was impos-
sible he should be holden of death. He understood the pro-
phecies in a sense he never perceived before, and the purposes
of the Lord's ascension, and the designed use of the gifts of the
Holy Spirit. So great a change, suddenly wrought in the mind
of an unlearned and ignorant man, was a demonstrative proof
of the presence of the Divine power, and of the truth of his
testimony to the facts he preached. The, character of this
apostle as delineated in the Gospels, and in the first fifteen
chapters of the Acts, presents in many respects very striking
contrasts.
Acts ii. 37 — 42. The effect of this first sermon of tlio new
dispensation is described in these verses. By some it is sup-
posed that the honour conferred upon Peter by choosing him
to preach it, and afterwards first to make known the gospel to
Gentiles, Acts xv. 7, was the fulfilment of the Saviour's pro-
mise to give him the keys of the kingdom of the heavens.
558 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
Matt. xvi. 19. It is not improbable that this honour was
included in that promise, but the full import of it, as those
in Matt. xix. 28; Luke xxii. 30, we apprehend will not be
exhausted until the kingdom of God shall come. Matt. vi. 10.
Acts ii. 43. "And great fear came upon every soul, and
wonders and signs were done by the apostles."
The only miracles of the day of Pentecost, so far as we know,
were the visible descent of the Holy Spirit upon the apostles,
and the discourses they held in new tongues ; for we infer from
verses 7 — 11, the other apostles, as well as Peter, proclaimed
the wonderful works of God, although their discourses are not
recorded. The reason may be that the matter of each was
similar, while the language in which it was clothed was various.
Peter, although he may have spoken in other tongues, pro-
nounced this discourse in the vernacular of the country, as he
addressed especially the men of Judea and dwellers of Jerusa-
lem, verse 14. The wonders and signs spoken of in the verse
we are now considering, were probably done by the apostles
after the day of Pentecost, but how long after we have no means
of determining. Nor are we informed what the miracles were,
nor by which of the apostles they were performed. There can
be no doubt, however, they were wrought in proof of the resur-
rection. Acts iv. 33, and ascension of the Lord Jesus. We
have seen that such was the use the apostle Peter made of the
visible descent of the Holy Spirit and the miraculous powers he
imparted to the apostles. The great miracle of the present
dispensation, or more accurately, of that brief interval between
the Passover and the Pentecost, was the resurrection and ascen-
sion of the Lord Jesus, and it was chiefly to establish and con-
firm the testimony of the apostles to these great facts, that
miraculous powers were conferred upon them. To the same
conclusion, the argument founded upon the miracle recorded in
the next chapter is directed. Acts iii. 15, 16; iv. 10; but to
this subject we shall return hereafter.
The effect of these wonders and signs upon the people at
large, whatever they may have been, was impressive and con-
ciliatory, while thp chief priests and rulers regarded them with
indignation, Acts v. 17, and as intended to bring upon them
guilt in shedding the blood of Jesus. Acts v. 28. They seemed
the revival of those wonderful powers which that crucified man
had lately exercised in the face of the whole people. How
futile the falsehood they invented and put ofi" upon the people
by the connivance of the guard they set at the sepulchre ! See
notes on Matt, xxviii. 11 — 15. The apostle does not even
allude to it as worthy of notice. Thus, the elements of strife
THE CHURCH. 559
and persecution were prepared, whicli very soon subjected the
apostles to new trials.
Acts ii. 47. " And the Lord added to the Church daily such
as should be saved."
The word [ixxXr^aca) church occurs in the Gospels only twice,
and both times in a private conversation which our Lord held
with his disciples near Csesarea Philippi. Matt. xvi. 18; xviii. 17.
The word occurs many times in the Greek version of the LXX,
see 1 Sam. xix. 20; Deut. xviii. 16; xxiii. 1, 2, 3—8; xxxi. 30;
see Trommii Concord., and usually signifies assembly or con-
gregation. In the same general sense, it occurs in Acts xix. 39.
Our Lord, however, adopted this word in a sense peculiar to his
own purposes, in contradistinction to the popular sense and usage
of the Jewish people. The Hebrew commonwealth itself was
(an IxxXr^aca) a church in contradistinction to other nations.
But it was an ecclesia or church which the Saviour foresaw
would reject him, and which therefore he would reject for ano-
ther to be formed out of it and all other nations, by the power
of the Holy Spirit, which he was about to purchase by his death.
Hence, in reading the passage in which the word first occurs,
Matt. xvi. 18, we should place some emphasis on the pronoun
my ; as if he had said, "Though this people know me not (see
verses 13, 14,) and therefore will reject me, yet by the teach-
ings of the Holy Spirit, who has taught thee, Simon, the mys-
tery of my person (verse 17,) I will build my church, (or I will
build a church for myself in the place of this people,) and
although I must be put to death, (Johnxii. 32,) and my people-
members of my church — shall die; yet death shall not prevail
against them. For I will rise from the dead, and I will raise
up my elect also, and gather them to myself as soon as their
number shall be completed." See notes on Matt. xvi. 18, and
on Luke xviii. 7.
In this expression, then, the Lord referred to the true Church
— that, namely, which is the product of his own Divine power,
which he will gather out of all people of all ages, and as the
master-builder erect and glorify.
The Church thus conceived of is destined to be the glory of
the New Creation. Its members will constitute, as the Scrip-
tures give us reason to believe, the most exalted rank of God's
creatures. They will stand nearest to his throne ; share in the
glory of the Saviour himself; and be united together, and to
him; and through him, to the Father, by bonds which can never
exist between God and any other order of creatures. This is
the Elect Church for which the Saviour interceded — "that they
all may be one, as thou Father art in me and I in thee, that
they may be one in us .... I in them, and thou in me, that
560
NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
thej may be perfect in one." John xvii. 21, 23, and see note.
Ihe meaning of these words is incomprehensible: eternal a^res
only will fully unfold it. For this Church the Lord has eone^'to
prepare a place. John xiv. 2.* This Church he will receive to
himself at his second coming. John xiv. 3; 1 Thess. iv. 14 17
It is only for the completion of this Church, he delays his com-
ing. See notes on Luke xviii. 7. Every member of it will
then be gifted with a body of glory like his own. Philip, iii 21 •
1 John ill. 2; Rom. viii. 29, 30; 1 Cor. xv. 42, 44. It will be
their happiness to be for ever with the Lord, wherever he may
be, and to behold his glory. John xvii. 24. Every member of
It will be angelic in his nature, Luke xx. 36, yet exalted above
the angels, Heb. i. 4; Rom. viii. 29, being made co-heirs with
Christ, Rom. viu. 17, and sharers of his glory and his throne.
John xvii. 22; Rev. iii. 21.
The inheritance of this Church is not the millennium, nor
even the earth itself, but all things. 1 Cor. iii. 21, 23 ; Rom.
viu. 38, 39. It is a low view of the subject which lim'its the
presence and employments of this glorious body of redeemed
ones to the earth. f They shall indeed reign on earth. Rev.
* The Saviour does not say, "I go to prepare a mansion {fxcm) for you," but
a place [t'-.ttou) intending, perhaps, to intimate thereby, that their mode of
being and employments will be different from those orders of creatures which
God has localized in worlds adapted to the particular constitution he has given
them. "In my Father's bouse (oi*/=t) dwellmg-place (alluding to the omnipo-
tence and omnipresence of God and the infinitude of his kingdom see Heb
111. 4; see Camerarius and Theophylaci in loco) are many mansions, \u,v^t i e
places prepared as residences or dwelling-places for various orders of intelligent
creatures.) If it were not so. (if this were the only world God had made for
creatures to dwell in,) I would have told you. I am now going away to pre-
pare (tcttcv) a place for you;" a place for your concourse and departure in
the service in which you will be employed, as well as of abiding. Such may
be one of the reasons for changing the word //ov« for to^toc
t Many persons who concur in the belief that the second advent of the
Lord will be pre-millennial, nevertheless entertain different expectations of
the state of the world during the millennium. Hence the term millennarian
has come to denote widely different and even discordant opinions. Some
things touching the condition of the earth during the millennium are clear
while others are left in obscurity. For example, we are expressly taught that
batan will be bound and cast out of the earth. Rev. xx. 1—7. The earth will
be delivered, in some large measure at least, from the bondage of the curse-
lor this deliverance is expressly connected by the apostle Paul with the mani-
festation of the sons of God, that is, with the resurrection and glorification of
the Elect Church. Rom viii. 19-23. Holiness will everywhere prevail.
Mai. 1. 11. Israel according to the flesh will be restored to the land of the
covenant, and permanently established therein and made eminently a holy
people. The theocracy will be re-established over them. The race of man
will propagate Itself as in preceding diiipensations. Isa. Ixv 17— '">5 But that
we can adequately conceive of this new order of things, appears to be as
impossible as It IS to conceive of the order of things, and their adaptation to
each otlier which God has established in some other world into which sin has not
entered. It will be a new earth. 2 Pet. iii. 13. Whatever it may be, however
THE ELECT CIIURCn. 661
V. 10 ; Matt. tix. 28 ; but they shall also reign with Christ for
ever and ever, and wherever he reigns. 2 Tim. ii. 12; Rev.
xxii. 5; xx. 4, 6. The vast realms of the Father's house —
the universal creation — will be open to them, see notes on
Matt, xxviii. 9, 10, and notes on John xx. 17; and it will
be their happiness and their glory to serve him, wherever and
in whatever he commands. Rev. vii. 15; xxii. 3.
In Matt, xviii. 17, however, our Lord evidently uses the
word [ixxh^ma) church to designate the visible Church on earth :
for he there lays down a rule of discipline which is impractica-
ble in any other sense. " Moreover, if thy brother trespass
against thee," &c., &c., ^Hell it to the Church, and if he neglect
to hear the Church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man
and a publican — regard him as you do those persons, whether
Jews or Gentiles, who have never professed faith in me, or
united themselves to your community."
it is not the inheritance or the hope of the Elect Church. Their inheritance
is much more exalted, and they will enter upon it at the coming of the Lord.
This consideration invests the question of the premillennial advent with
intense interest. It is the great practical point of the whole subject with
■which it is usually connected. Upon this question accordingly, the Scriptures
are so clear, that they leave no reasonable ground for doubt or hesitation.
They announce the coming of the Lord as an event constantly to be watched
for, at all times; as the last article of the last chapter of the Westminster
Confession of Faith most explicitly declares. With this event, as has been
already said, are connected the resurrection of the righteous dead, atid their
exaltation and glorification, together with the living elect. 1 Thess. iv. 14 — 17.
Consequently it is the epoch around which the hopes and expectations of all
the members of the mystical body of Christ gather. It will be the epoch of
their complete and eternal enlarijement from the bondage brought upon them
by sin, and of their conformity to their glorious Head. If the souls of
believers, during their separate state, are conscious, and capable of exercising
their intellectual and moral faculties — a question upon which there is not the
slightest ground for doubt, Philip, i. 21 — 24; 2 Cor. v. 8 — it must be the great
object of their expectation and desire. For what can they desire so much, as
to be clothed upon with the bodies of glory promised them? However glorious
and happy they are now, yet a greater glory and a greater capacity for happi-
ness is in store for them. Why the possible nearness of the consummation of
hopes so transcendently glorious, should be repulsive to any who really love
the Saviour, and love his appearing, 2 Tim. iv. 8 — or why any of the Lord's
people should feel relieved or comforted by the assurance that their glorious
Head will certainly delay his coming a thousand years, thereby postponing
also the promised restitution of all things. Acts iii. 21, for Israel and the
nations of the earth — are questions hard to explain. See Luke xxi. 28 ; Jolin
xiii. 37; 2 Cor. v. 4; Rev. xxii. 20; Matt. xxiv. 48. This hope takes nothing
from the rest of the world. The millennium of blessedness still remains to
men in the flesh. It will not increase the happiness of the future generations
of men who shall enjoy that state, to know that the consummation of the hnp-
piness of the saints of former ages is still deferred. On the contrary, it will
increase it to be assured that glorified beings in their nature, have been com-
missioned, in the place of angels, for active service among them. If the Scrip-
tures were obscure or doubtful upon this question, one would suppose that
every true believer would feel a strong bias to resolve them, if possible, ia
favour of the earlier consummation of his hopes.
71
662 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
Accordingly we find this word used in both senses in the
Acts and Epistles of the apostles and the book of Revelation.
In the first sense it is employed in Eph. i. 22 ; iii. 10 ; v. 25,
27, 28, 32; Col. i. 18, 24; Heb. xii. 23; see also 1 Pet. i. 1
and 2. In the latter or lower sense, in Acts v. 11; viii. 1
xi. 26; xiv. 23, 27; xv. 3, 22; xviii. 22; Rom. xvi. 5; 1 Cor
iv. 17; xiv. 4, 5, 23; xvi. 19; Philip, iii. 6; iv. 15; Col. iv
15; 1 Tim. v. 16; Philem. 2; John iii. 6, 9, and other places
When used in the plural it is to be so understood; Acts ix. 31
XV. 41; xvi. 5; Rom. xvi. 4, 16; 1 Cor. vii. 17; xi. 16; xiv.
33, 34; xvi. 1, 19 ; 2 Cor. viii. 1, 19, 23, &c.
In this latter sense, the Church is a mixed body, whether we
consider it as one, united under one visible head, as Romanists
do, or as many bodies separately organized, and acknowledging
no headship but Christ. In either form it is, like the ancient
Hebrew Commonwealth, a people called out, and separated by
ordinances and outward profession from the rest of the world,
within which God has an election of grace. Rom. xi. 5, 7.
To call out, collect, organize, govern, and teach these bodies is
the appointed work of the Christian ministry, while the Lord
himself carries on his own proper work of grace, for the most
part, within their bounds. See notes on Mark xvi. 15, 16.
In the first sense the Church has not yet appeared. The
lives of all its members are hid with Christ in God. The
greater number of them have passed the gates of death, and
have no longer a local habitation or name on the earth. The
Head of this invisible body is himself invisible, and it is only
when he shall appear, that they will appear with him. In the
verse under consideration it is said, "The Lord added to the
Church daily such as should be saved." These, no doubt, were
true converts and members of the Church in both senses of
the word. Their conversion was the Lord's own work. One
observation more. In Matt. xvi. 18, our Lord uses the word
Church prospectively, having respect to the then future work
of the Holy Spirit.* It is not at all probable that the apostles
* The phrase Ett/ tawth th mrpu., upon ihts rock, we repeat, does not refer
immediately to what Peter had said, but to what the Lord had said in reply to
Peter. "Flesh and blood hath not revealed it," — viz. the mystery of my
person as God-man, the Christ — "to thee, but my Father," &c. The truth
which Peter had declared was beyond the reach of human sagacity to dis-
cover. He could not have learned it except by the teaching of the Spirit,
and he was blessed, because he had thus been taught and distinguished
above his fellow-disciples, in having been Jirsl taught it. Having pro-
nounced this blessing upon Simon, and given him a new name, Peter; (taken
from the Hebrew word, ^fi5, see Hesychius and Alberti's Glossaries ad voc,
also Jerome on Hebrew names,) from that fact the Lord proceeded to make
the (jeneral remark, " and upon this work of the Spirit, (in revealing to otliers,
as he has now revealed to thee, the mystery of the Christ as God-man,) as
THE MIRACLE OF HEALING. 563
at that time comprehended his meaning. It was one of the
things they were to be taught by the Paraclete — the Comforter.
John xiv. 26; xvi. 13. With exact propriety, therefore, St.
Luke avoids the use of this word to designate the body of
believers, until after the descetit of the Holy Spirit, although
an uninspired writer, not perceiving this mystery, would have
found an earlier occasion to use it. See Acts i. 15, 21.
Acts hi. In the first part of this chapter we have a par-
ticular account of a miracle of healing performed on a man
above forty years old, iv. 22, who had been lame from his birth,
iii. 2. It appears to have been performed without the exercise
of faith on his part, or even any expectation or hope of the
benefit he actually received, verses 3 — 5. The apostles Peter
and John no doubt acted under the promptings of the Holy
Spirit, with the design to attest their authority, and confirm
their testimony as witnesses of the resurrection of the Lord
Jesus. The place and the hour were fitly chosen for this pur-
pose, as the event showed. The miracle suggests many inter-
esting reflections, but as our object is chiefly to point out the
use made of it, we pass immediately to the address of Peter.*
upon a rock, (which can never be removed or shaken,) will I build my Church,
against which no power — not death itself — shall ever prevail. This explana-
tion is according to the truth : for no one not taught by the Holy Spirit ever
really discerns (whatever he may think or profess) the mystery of Christ.
Unitarianism is a religion of human reason — not of Divine teaching, or know-
ledge, or power.
* The miracle was performed while Peter was {tiynpi) in the act of raising
the lame man from his seat, and it consisted in imparting strength to his feet
and ankles, not the art of using it, verse 7. Hence we may account for the
irregular effects or actions of the cripple described in the next (8th) verse,
and for his holding on to both Peter and John as mentioned in the eleventh,
verse. Walking, and even standing in an erect posture, is an art acquired
by much practice. Dr. Paley somewhere observes, that a child learning to
walk is the greatest posture master in the world. A man who had never
attempted to walk or stand erect, until. he had acquired the ordinary strength
of an adult, would get along very awkwardly, if at all. He would not know
how to put forth his strength in a graduated measure, just sufficient to assume
an erect position, and walk in an easy and, as we say, natural way. Thug
considered, the descripticin contains strong internal evidence of its truth.
Notice the word i^stAxo/^si'oc, it means leaping or springing up. We should
suppose a man in these circumstances would from want of practice exert hia
newly-received strength suddenly, and to its full extent. Again, he does not
advance forward in a direct line, but (srs/j/ewaTa) circuitously, and with a bound-
ing motion [aKho/xmi;) as he went. He kept fast hold of Peter and John, to
aid him in maintaining the posture of standing ; at least he would need to do
so if the miracle extended no further than to give him strength. We caa
easily believe that the cripple was very joyous, and thankful to God for the
great blessing conferred on him, in restoring him to perfect soundness, verse
16, and very grateful to Peter and John, by whom he received it; and we
concede that such emotions are naturally expressed by external actions, such
as it is supposed are here described ; yet, upon the supposition that the crip-
ple had no such emotions, the manner of his rising, his incipient attempts to
664 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
Acts hi. 12. "And Peter seeing" how all the people ran
together unto them, in the porch called Solomon's, greatly
wondering, addressed them thus :
"Ye men of Israel, why marvel ye at this, and why look ye
so earnestly (intently) on us, as though by our own power or
holiness we had made this man to walk ?"
By this we learn that the miracle immediately attracted and
fixed the attention of the people, (of whom there was a large
concourse at that hour, verse 1 and iv, 4,) upon the apostles
themselves, and prepared them to listen with respect to what
the apostles should say. It was designed by the Holy Spirit
that it should have this effect. It was one of the means HE
employed to accomplish his own work. Hence Peter, speaking
as the Spirit gave him utterance, disclaimed for himself and
John the power or holiness by which this wonderful work was
done, while the work itself was an incontestable proof of a
present power and holiness some way connected with their per-
sons, not unlike that which they had witnessed in the person of
the Lord Jesus. It is worthy of remark that the apostle
ascribes to holiness'^ (or ebas^eca, piety) the power of accom-
plishing miraculous effects.
Holiness, or piety, is by God's appointment a power, or the
medium for the transmission of Divine power, as faith is ; imper-
fectly seen, it is true, in this life, owing to the imperfections of
the most perfect Christian character. In the world to come,
however, we have reason to believe its effects will be visible,
decided, constant, unerring. Why should it be thought incredi-
ble that a perfectly holy being of any rank or order, whether
man or angel, should be mightier in strength, or have more
varied and wonderful powers than a sinful being of any rank
or order, whether man or devil? See Luke x. 19; iv. 34, 35;
Mark i. 24 ; Matt. xxi. 21, 22 ; Mark xi. 22, 28, 24.
Having disclaimed all personal efficiency in the work, the
apostle proceeds immediately to point out the true source of
the energy invisibly present, and in doing so, he charges them
with the greatest of their sins.
Acts hi. 13. " The God of Abraham and of Isaac and of
Jacob — the God of [all] our fathers, ^hath glorified his Son
walk, and his laying hold of the apostles for support — considered with regard
to a man in those circumstances — are described with the truthfulness of
nature. They could not have been otherwise, unless the miracle imparted with
the strength to walk the art of using it. See Mark v. 43.
* Instead of «>«/3ai some MSS. have i^ouirn. or iuBivux, potestate, robore, viri-
bus. See Mill. Proleg. 438, Beza in loco. But Beza preferred the common
reading, as he found no other in any of the MSS. he possessed, and it gives
an excellent sense, and in all probability is the true reading. See John ill.
2; ix. 31.
Peter's discourse. 565
[servant] Jesiis, wliom ye delivered up; and ye denied [re-
jected] him in the presence of Pilate, even after he had
resolved [decided] to let him go [release him]. And [in doing
this] ye denied [rejected] the Holy and the Just One, and
desired [preferred] a murderer [Barabbas] to be granted unto
you [as a more gratifying fiivour]. But [Jesus] the Prince
[the author] of life ye killed [hoping thus to destroy him ; but
in vain for] ; God hath raised him up from [among] the dead,
of which [fact] we are witnesses."
This language is very forcible; observe the varied designa-
tion of God: "The God of Abraham — the God of Isaac — the
God of Jacob — the God of all our fathers" — the God of the
temple, in which you now stand, as worshippers. Observe
again, the titles he ascribes to Jesus of Nazareth, in whose
name expressly, verse 6, the miracle was performed. Jesus —
God's Son — the Holy One — the Just One — Him he declares,
God hath glorified. We do not understand this word [ido^aas)
glorified in the lower sense of the honour reflected by the
miracle performed in his name, but in the sense of the exalta-
tion and glorification of his human person. Acts ii. 33, 36, for
that was a point to be proved as well as his resurrection from
the dead.
Next, the charge: It is direct and personal; for the apostle
discriminates between the persons whom he addressed and their
rulers, who were not then present ; and as the very words of the
apostle were prompted by the Holy Spirit, we safely conclude,
the verj- persons who were at that moment gathered around
the apostles, or at least many of them, were the same who had
stood before Pilate and vociferously demanded the crucifixion
of Jesus. See notes on Mark xv. 13; Matt, xxvii. 22; Luke
xxiii. 21; Mark xv. 14; Luke xxiii. 23. The particulars of
the charge justify this conclusion, " Whom ye delivered up and
denied [or rejected in answer to the demand of Pilate when ye
stood in his presence, and that too] after he had [not only
declared his innocence, but had] resolved to let him go." To
such, these words, how appalling !
The contrast which the apostle draws between their conduct
and Pilate's, aggravates immensely their personal guilt; and
their choice of a murderer, in the exercise of their adrnittecl
•privilege, to have any one released whom they chose, shoAvs that
the guilt of the people was scarcely less than that of their rulers.
See notes on Matt, xxvii. 15, 16; Mark xv. 6, 7, 8; John
xviii. 39, 24 ; xix. 13, 14.
Having thus set before his audience their crime, he proceeds
to declare the fact of the resurrection of Jesus, which he con-
566 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
firmed by the testimony of Jolm as well as liis own, and proceeds
immediately to ascribe the miracle to the proper cause.
Acts hi. 16. "And his name [that is, he, Jesus] through
[by means of our] faith in his name hath made this man, whom
ye see and know, [perfectly sound and] strong."
The cure could not be denied, iv. 14, nor the fact that it
was performed in the name of Jesus of Nazareth, iii. 6. The
apostles were known to have been his followers, iv. 13, and
they professed to follow him still. It seemed a continuance of
the miraculous powers which the Lord Jesus was known to
have exercised. Such power proved their authority as servants
of him whom they acknowledged, and the truth of their testi-
mony to the facts they proclaimed. For this purpose chiefly,
we suppose, the miracle was wrought.
The faith spoken of in this verse, as already intimated, was
the faith of the apostles. There is nothing in the account of
the miracle which leads us to believe the cripple was expecting
to be healed. On the contrary, when, in obedience to the
command of Peter, he gave heed to the apostles, he did it,
expecting to receive such alms as they had not to bestow,
verses 3 — 6 ; whether faith was imparted at the same time with
the healing power, is a question upon which we have no light;
but if so, it was not a 'prerequisite to the miracle.
Upon this subject it may be remarked that our Lord per-
formed many miracles, as proofs of his Divine mission and
authority upon persons incapable of exercising faith — such as
children, demoniacs, and even the dead, as well as on others,
who, though capable of faith, did not seek him in the exercise
of it. John v. 7, 8; Matt. viii. 28, 32; Luke vii. 11—15.
Peter and John, in this instance, followed his example. The
chief design of the miracle was to prove the resurrection of the
Lord Jesus, and his exaltation to glory. It aroused the atten-
tion of his murderers to that fact, and was made by the Holy
Spirit the means of convicting many of them.
But the Lord performed miracles by Ids own power, which it
is unnecessary to add the apostles could not do, either before or
after his resurrection. See Mark xvi. 17.*
* When persons sought the Lord during his personal ministry, or his apostles
after his resurrection, for healing, faith in him was indispensable. In this
there is no inconsistency. Considered as attestations of authority, or as proofs
of facts, the object of miracles is quite distinct from the benefits bestowed by
them. It was necessary that the evidence should be given to fix upon the
people the responsibility of rejecting the facts proclaimed; and, like the com-
mon gifts of Providence, it was given especially by our Lord, in the greatest
profusion, irrespectively of the faith of those who enjoyed the benefits of his
miracles. But when persons sought him for the blessing, if sincere, they ac-
knowledged the authority of him whom they approached, and could receive it
only through their faith in him.
Peter's discourse. 567
Acts hi. 17-. "And now, brethren, I know tliat through
ignorance ye did it, as also your rulers."
Observe the change in the apostle's address. He had just
before charged them as Israelites — their national name — with
the most heinous of their crimes. Now, he calls them hretltren,
and makes the only extenuation of their guilt which their case
admitted. They did it igyioranily, yet in the indulgence of
sinful passions, and against evidence which should have con-
vinced them, see Acts ii. 23; 1 Cor. ii. 8; 1 Tim. i. 13; but in
so doing, they had not frustrated — rather they had fulfilled —
the foretold purposes of God. On this ground he proceeds to
exhort them.
Acts hi. 19 — 21. "Repent ye, therefore, and be converted,
in order that your sins may be blotted out — that times of re-
freshing may come [oTtcoz dv iXdcoot y.acf)oc, Luke ii. 35] from the
presence of the Lord, and that he may send [xojc a.izoozscXr[\
Jesus Christ [again] who before was preached [or rather ivJio
before tvas ordained or appointed, Tipoxe'^eipKT/jsuov, see Beza's
Commentary^ unto you, whom [nevertheless] the heavens must
receive [detain or keep from you as a people] until the times of
[appointed in the Divine counsels for] the restitution of all
things," &c.
These verses are not accurately rendered in the common
English version, as has been observed by many commentators,
(see Lightfoot, Doddrige, Scott, Adam Clarke,*) and conclusively
shown by Dr. J. A. Alexander, in his learned commentary on
the Acts. The translators probably were influenced by their
doctrinal views concerning the destiny of Israel and the posi-
tion they occupy in the scheme of the Divine government of
the earth. • That events of such vast magnitude and importance
as the second personal coming of the Lord, and the restitution
of all things, should be suspended, by Divine appointment, upon
the repentance and conversion of Israel, is a proposition which
many persons find it difficult to receive. In what is Israel
better than any other people? Rom. iii. 29. Is not the middle
wall of partition broken down? Eph. ii. 14. Are we not
taught expressly that there is now no difference between the
Jew and the Greek? Gal. iii. 28; Col. iii. 11. Such are the
inquiries of many, to which, they suppose, no answer can be
* Professor Scholefiekl, while he evidently prefers the authorized translation
of oTaijuv, admits that it is ah unusual one. He suggests, that before it is dis-
carded on that ground, the following examples, among others, sluuild he well
considered: Rom. xv. 24, i: 'ctv. 1 Cor. xi. 34, U uv; Philip, ii. 23, Josh. ii. 14,
Sept., U civ. He adds, that Tcrtullian translated the passage in question, " Ut
tempora vnhis supervenianl refrigeriV— Hints for the Improvement of the Author-
ized Version.
563 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
given, consistent with the exhortation of the apostle if it is thus
understood.
But we observe that Peter connects the national conversion
of Israel with the promised times of refreshing, and the resti-
tution of all things, that is with a new dispensation — which at
that time was distant, but not known to be so, even bj the in-
spired apostles — until which, the wall of partition will be broken
down, and no distinction will be made between Jew or Greek.
Until this dispensation of the Gospel to the Gentiles, therefore,
shall be closed, and the Lord shall return, Israel will not be
restored to their peculiar privileges under the Abrahamic and
Davidic covenants. Acts xv. 14—16. So the apostle teaches.
Why then, it may be inquired again, should the apostle
address them at that time by such motives, seeing the present
dispensation had already commenced, and the times of their
national restoration to the favour of God were postponed? To
this inquiry it may be answered:
While God spared the nation and their temple (about thirty-
seven years) they could be approached as a community or com-
monwealth, by the apostles, as they had been by John the
Baptist and our Lord. It was for this very purpose^ we suggest,
their national existence was mercifully prolonged, peradventure
they might still repent and believe iia Jesus. It was a perad-
ve7iture, however, only in human regard, though entirely con-
sonant with the dealings of God with that people, as the ministry
of John the Baptist and of the Lord himself conclusively proves.
Acts XV. 18; John vi. 44, 45; xii. 37 — 41. If we adopt this
suggestion, we may reasonably account for the form of this
address of the apostle and the national considerations by which
he urged their immediate and universal repentance. -It supplies,
also, a reason for the Saviour's command to the apostles to
begin their preaching at Jerusalem, Luke xxiv. 47, in obedience
to which command this discourse was delivered. Hence the
delay to carry the gospel to the Gentiles, which is commonly sup-
posed to have been about seven years. It is plain also from
other places. Acts xiii. 46; Rom. i. 16; ii. 9, 10; Acts xi. 19,
that while _ the temple stood, the Jews had not entirely lost
their priority. During all this time, they were regarded and
treated by the apostles, as the children of the prophets and of
the covenant, ^ iii. 25 ; and as such, nationally entitled to the
blessings of it, on the condition of their national repentance
and faith, notwithstanding their national sin of rejecting and
crucifying the Lord Jesus. Consistently with this view the
apostles themselves observed Levitical rites and permitted their
Jewish converts to do so. Acts xxi. 20 — 25; xvi. 3; xx. 16.
These observances by the apostles are not to be regarded as
Peter's discourse. 669
temporizing expedients resorted to by them to avoid the eflfcct
of inveterate Jewish prejudices, but practices 2^^'oper to be
allowed, while God permitted the nation to exist and the
temple to stand. The* kingdom of heaven, if we may so say,
was still at hand in the same sense as when John the Baptist
and our Lord so preached it. Matt. iii. 2; iv. 17. There was
no impediment in the way of its immediate establishment in
either case but the national unbelief and impenitence; and to
remove these the Holy Spirit's influences had now been pur-
chased by the Saviour's death, and were offered to them.
Hence the first offer of the gospel was made to this people
under the new dispensation.
We have no reason to believe God would have permitted the
Romans to destroy the temple and scatter the people among all
nations, had they, one and all, obeyed the exhortation of the
apostle and received the Lord with the obedience of faith.
But what form of worship he would have superinduced upon
that of the temple, or established in its place in the event sup-
posed, is to us a speculative inquiry. We may suppose, that
it would have been the same as he will hereafter establish upon
the restoration and national conversion of that people. Waiving,
however, such inquiries, we pass on to remark :
The destruction of the temple and the dispersion of the
people was a new epoch in their history. Many parts of their
ritual thenceforth became impracticable. It was no longer
possible for the preachers of the gospel to approach them as a
nation. As such they lost their priority during their disper-
sion, see Rom. ii. 9; iii. 9, and as individuals no difference was
made or could be made between them and the Gentiles, in the
bestowment of church privileges. On this ground, we infer
that special efforts for the conversion of the Jews, during their
dispersion, though eminently proper, cannot now be enforced
by the peculiar motives which the apostle here uses. Nor do
we suppose the organization of them into separate churches, or
the observance of Levitical rites by Jewish Christians, since
that event, can be justified by the examples or precepts of the
apostles during this period; their conduct, in this respect, being
founded upon the Divine forbearance with the nation in allowing
them a little further space for repentance, and the gracious pur-
pose of the Saviour to give them still the first offer of the king-
dom they had so lately rejected.
Thus interpreted, this exhortation* of the apostle is in har-
mony with the doctrine concerning the church, as contained in
the Epistles and other parts of the New Testament.
Acts III. 21. "Whom the heavens must receive until the
times of the restitution of all things," &c.
72
570 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
The restitution of all things, of necessity includes the
restitution of all things contained m the Abrahamic and
Davidic covenants — as well the things especially promised
to the posterity of Jacob as those in which the Gentiles have
a part. With this event the Saviour connects the future
mission of Elias, Matt. xvii. 11; but his office and work,
whatever they may be, like John the Baptist's, will be con-
fined, as we suppose, to Israel, after they shall have been
restored to their land. With this event, we have seen, are
also connected the second coming of the Lord, the resurrection
and the glorification of the Elect, and times of refreshing
or relief from the effects of the curse. We dwell a little on
this topic.
The various dispensations of God's government over the
earth and man are among the grandest themes of the Bible.
They are stages or parts of an infinite scheme which join on
to others yet hidden deep in the Divine mind. Eph. ii. 7.
They were all appointed and arranged by God the Son ; they
are upheld and unfolded by his power for the ever increasing
display of the Divine attributes. Heb. i. 2, 3.
The first dispensation, of which we have only a brief notice,
was characterized by the absence of all physical and moral
evil, during which man had personal intercourse with his
Maker. We may call this the dispensation of Paradise, or the
dispensation of the kingdom of the heavens. Gen. i., ii. ; Lam.
iii. 38; Rom. viii. 20. How long it continued we do not
know, but at the fall of man it was closed, and the kingdom
of the heavens was withdrawn. Gen iii. 17, 18. This kingdom
was brought nigh again, when John the Baptist appeared, but
not established, because rejected by the Jews to whom it was
preached.
There is a remarkable expression of Moses, in Deut. xi. 21,
which seems to allude to the physical change in the condition
of the earth at that epoch. Gen. iii. 18, 19. The lawgiver
exhorts the people to obedience by the motive, "that their
days may be multiplied and the days of their children, in the
land which the Lord sware unto their fathers to give them; as
the days of heaven [literally of the heavens] upon earth;'' as
if he had said, days of blessedness and glory such as the world
does not now enjoy — days of Paradise, such as the world
enjoyed before the blessings of God's kingdom were withdrawn.
The exhortation is not unKke that of Peter, in Acts iii. 19, for
the days of the heavens, understood in the sense of the prophet,
would be days of refreshing in the sense of the apostle.
However this may be, at the fall of man a new dispensation
came over the earth; God withdrew his kingdom and permitted
THE DIFFERENT DISPENSATIONS. 571
the powers of evil to prevail, yet set bounds to tliera as
he did to the sea, which they should not pass. Gen. iii. 17, 18;
John xiv. 30; xii. 31; xvi. 11; Eph. ii. 2; Col. ii. 15;
Heb. ii. 14. The earth was subjected to vanity and cor-
ruption. Rom. viii. 20. In the bold and figurative language
of Paul, the creature, that is, the whole fabric of physical
nature, and man also, was made to groan and travail in pain
together, under the displeasure of the Creator. Rom. viii. 22.
The change was vast beyond our conceptions. Whether it
came over the world suddenly, as the blight and withering of
the fig-tree the Lord cursed, Mark xi. 14, 20, 21 ; Matt. xxi.
19, 20, or gradually, as some have supposed, it would be
fruitless to inquire. But, however wrought, it was quite a
difi"erent order of things. We may call it the dispensation of
the fall, or of the curse, or of the kingdom of the heavens with-
drawn. Rom. V. 12. This dispensation still continues, yet not
without the hope of restitution. Rom. viii. 20. For God has
purposed to repair the mighty ruin — and ruin it is, though it
seem fair and beautiful to man who knows nothing better —
and restore the former state.
Our Lord, with allusion to his first work of creation, calls
this his purposed work of restitution, the regeneration^ palin-
genesia, or second creation. Rev. xxi. 5. The apostle Paul
refers to the same restitution in Eph. i. 10, by the words
"dispensation of the fulness of times," that is, the dispensation
appointed to ensue upon the completion of the order of things
now existing; as does the apostle Peter, in his second Epistle,
chap. iii. 7, 13, and the passage under consideration. See
Isa. Ixv. 17—25.
These are the great dispensations made known 1;o us, ■ of
which most commentators have not taken sufficient notice.
Those which they have chiefly enlarged upon, are really
subdivisions of the dispensation introduced by the fall, and
the coming in of the curse. But these are subordinate
and remedial in their nature, and subservient in their de-
sign, to the coming of the kingdom of God on earth,
the expulsion of sin, and the cause of every physical and
moral evil. In their progress, they display to all creatures
in all worlds the attributes and the glory of God, in a
manner which otherwise, so far as we can know, would
have been impossible, consistent with the Divine wisdom
and goodness. The manifestation of the essential attributes
of the Godhead thus made, considered relatively to the
eternal well-being of the universe, is a good immeasurably
surpassing the evils resulting from the temporary and com-
572 NOTES ON scripttjr:e.
paratively brief disorder permitted in this world. But to
resume :
The first of these subordinate dispensations is commonly
called the Patriarchal. It began with the birth of the first
man, and continued universal, until the whole race, excepting a
few, was swept from the face of the earth. This period in the
history of man is called by St. Peter "the world that then was,"
2 Epist. iii. 6, intimating that it was essentially a difi"erent con-
dition of things from that which now exists. The patriarchal
economy was re-established with Noah ; and with respect to the
larger part of his descendants, has ever since remained un-
changed. See Sir G. H. Rose's Essays — Article, China. Its
results are visible in the abominations of idolatry. In respect
to the posterity of Jacob, this economy ended at their exodus
from Egypt, under the leadership of Moses, and the giving of
the law at Mount Sinai fifty days afterwards. That people
were then brought into new covenant relations with God, and
thenceforward were regarded as a peculiar and elect people.
Exod. xix. 5, 6 ; Numb, xxiii. 9. The economy thus estab-
lished over this small portion of the human family terminated
with the mysterious rending of the veil of the temple; to be
succeeded by the dispensation of the Holy Spirit. This, like
the patriarchal dispensation, is universal in its scope, but not so
in its effects. The especial design of it is to gather an elect
people out of all nations. Acts xv. 14, not the universal salva-
tion of all men, in any age of it. Universal holiness belongs
only to the times of the kingdom of God, Matt. vi. 10, when
the tempter will be cast out. Rev. xx. 3, 10; John xii. 31,
and all things restored. Then, as we have reason to believe,
the Holjr Spirit will act with powers unknown since the
fall. As at the beginning. Gen. i. 2, his energies will be felt
again by physical nature, and the sphere of his operations on
the moral nature of man will be universal.
When we consider the vastness of this scheme of dispensa-
tions; (or even of the parts in which almost the whole history
of man, and of God's dealings with him hitherto, are included,)
and reflect that the whole rests and turns upon the God-man,
Christ Jesus, Isa. ix. 6, we are apt to forget the humanity-side
of his character. That a Being so great, so glorious, should
become incarnate, in order to die in the nature assumed, is a
mystery, the scope, design, and the effect of which the Spirit
of God alone can comprehend. 1 Cor. ii. 8 — 11.
The particular place which' we occupy in the scheme, is
several times called in Scripture the last days, Heb. i. 2;
2 Tim. iii. 1; 2 Pet. iii. 3; James v. 3; see 1 Pet. i. 5,
20 ; Jude xviii., by which expression we understand the ulti-
THE RESTITUTION OF ALL THINGS. 673
mate subdivision or portion of the second of the great dis-
pensations before mentioned — viz. the Dispensation of the
Fall. We infer from it that no other economy will intervene
before the restitution of all things spoken of in this verse.*
The words, "restitution of all things," it is unnecessary to
observe, imply a former condition of things, which does not at
present exist. See Matt. xii. 13, Gr., also Mark iii. 5. Taking
the words in the largest sense, as we should, they carry us
back to the perfect work of the Creator at the beginning, which
he pronounced very good. Gen. i. 31. No condition inferior
to this can properly be called a restitution, nor be well pleasing
to God, all whose works and ways are perfect. The times of
restitution, we have seen, depend on the personal coming of
Christ, which under no preceding economy since the fall, has
been precisely revealed. Gen. iii. 15 ; xlix. 10 ; Isa. vii. 14 ;
Dan. ix. 24; Luke ii. 26; xxi. 25—28; Mark xiii. 32;
1 Thess. V. 2, 3. Conditionally they were connected with
the first coming of Christ, Exod. xix. 5, 6; Matt, xxiii.
37 ; Luke xix. 41—44, but as the Jews rejected him, the king-
dom was taken from them, Matt. xxi. 43, and the restitution
deferred, until another elect people should be formed and sub-
stituted in their place. 1 Pet. ii. 9. It is still deferred only
because this elect body— the Church— is not yet completed.
See notes on Luke xviii. 7.
Do we inquire in what the restitution will consist? or how
far the things now seen will be altered? or according to what
scheme or fashion (6 xotr/joc) the world will be framed^ or
formed? 1 Cor. vii. 31. We can form no adequate conception,
either of the transformation itself, or of the power by which it
will be wrought. We can only say, in the words of inspiration,
the whole of this lower creation shall be delivered from the
bondage of corruption, and' made to share in some way in the
glorious liberty of the children of God. Rom. viii. 21. Nor
do we know whether the restitution will be accomplished all at
once or progressively ; although there is some ground to believe
that the final dispensation will be divided into subordinate
economies of increasing glory, as the dispensation of the fall
has been. The apostle Paul intimates, Eph. ii. 7, that God has
in store for his elect people {Iv tok: altoac roic kntpX'^n^voc^) a
series or ascending scale of economies or stages througli which
they shall advance from glory to glory. 2 Cor. iii. 18. The
* In 2 Pet. iii., we find the expression W io-^-xrou tw ifAipaiv (roev yx'^Tuv) hy
which the apostle intends the etidincf, or the latter part, of the undefined period
called "the last days." His object is to direct the mind of his readers, not
to the last days generally, but to the latter portion of the last days, and show
a sign of the near approach of the new dispensation.
574 NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
world itself may also in like manner have progress towards
higher degrees of blessedness and glory.
It has been made a question whether the millennium will not
he the initiatory economy of the restitution, to be followed by
others of which we have not a distinct notice. Others positively
maintain that the millennium will precede the coming of the
Lord, and of course the restitution of all things. This opinion
is irreconcilable with the doctrine of Scripture concerning the
uncertainty or possible nearness of the coming of the Lord, so
far as men can know or be assured, and should therefore be
rejected as erroneous. If, however, we regard the millennium,
according to the first opinion, as the introductory economy of
the restitution of all things, the next two verses convey an
intimation of great changes in the Divine government then to
be established over Israel.
Acts hi. 22, 23. "For Moses truly said unto the fathers,
A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your
brethren, like unto me : him shall ye hear in all things. And
it shall come to pass that every soul which will not hear that
prophet shall be destroyed from among the people." Deut.
xvii. 15, 18, 19.
These words of Moses have respect chiefly to the coming of
Christ at and for the restitution of all things. In a qualTfied
sense, we may apply the 23d verse to the Jews, at the first
coming of Christ, when in consequence of their sins they were
destroyed as a nation, though still preserved as a race. Pro-
perly, however, they signify the excision of individuals from
the nation, and not the destruction of the nation as such. But
understood of the whole body as a nation hereafter to be
restored to their land under the new dispensation, they import
that Israel, at least, shall be all righteous, as Isaiah foretells,
chaps. Ix. 21; liv. 13. The rule of duty for them, will be
perfect obedience in all things. Transgressors, should there
be such, we are taught .by these verses will be visited with
immediate and condign punishment, each for himself. Matt.
V. 48; Jer. xxxi. 29, 30; Isa. Ixv. 20. The word {i^oXodpeu-
dr^asrac) translated destroyed, signifies much more, we appre-
hend, than excommunication from the Church. It means
pliysical destruction or extermination, see Vulgate, Erasmus,
3Iontanus, and such appears to be the sense of the passage the
apostle quotes. Thus interpreted, the words declare a rule of
government which has never yet been applied to that people.
Nothing sinful will then be permitted to Israel on account of
the hardness of their hearts. Matt. xix. 8. The words imply
also the restoration of Theocracy in the perfect form of the
kingdom come. Matt. vi. 10. Then their sins, should sinners
THE RESTITUTION OF ALL THINGS. 575
be found among tliem, Isa. Ixv. 20, will be committed wit.'iout
temptation, Rev. xx. 2, 9, against light and knowledge, Jor.
xxxi. 34; Heb. viii. 11, and in despite of the Holy Spirit's
influences and the greatest earthly blessings. Luke xii. 48.
The apostles, we are taught, will in some way have rule over
them, yet, in what manner they will exercise their government,
it is impossible, from the light we now have, to conjecture.
But the language of the Saviour, Matt. xix. 28 ; Luke xxii. 30,
does not compel us to believe that they will dwell on the earth,
or at all times visibly appear among their tribes, or sit on
thrones of earthly splendour. It must be confessed, however,
that the whole subject of the coming dispensation lies beyond
the sphere of our conceptions. So great, so universal will the
change be, whenever and by whatever degrees introduced and
perfected, that the former earth will not be remembered nor
come into mind. Isa. Ixv, 17. What is supernatural now may
be natural then, and what is now natural, may then, should it
occur, be miraculous. In other words, there is nothing in man
or in nature as they now are, which can serve us as an adequate
standard of conception. See notes on Matt. iii. 2; xix. 28;
also, notes on John xviii. 36, for further remarks on the subject
of the kingdom.
One observation more : "We have seen that the fall of Israel
retarded the times of the restitution. The falling away of the
Church, 2 Thess. ii. 3, has also retarded them. The restitution
still depends upon the repentance of Israel, but Israel is given
over to blindness until the period allotted for the gathering of the
elect Church shall have elapsed, Rom. xi. 25, and this event by
the Divine purpose is made to depend upon the universal pro-
mulgation of the gospel among all nations. Matt. xxiv. 14.
The times of restitution, therefore, humanly speaking, depend
upon the full execution of the Saviour's last command. Matt,
xxviii. 19, 20; Mark xvi. 15.
THE END.
INDEX OF CONTENTS.
Abraham, 36.
Adam, 89, 210, 363.
Advent, 1S8, 272, 323, 324, 530, 531.
Aloes, 441.
Angels, 200, 280, 281, 465, 468, 459, 463,
468, 469, 639.
Apostles, 136, 189, 191, 192, 193.
, their ambitious desires, 227,
228, 229.
call, 100.
, care extended over them, 101,
102.
commission, 101, 191.
. after Christ's as-
cension, 633, 634.
deficiency in a clear appre-
hension of Christ's deity, 186.
, distinctions between their
missions before and after Christ's
resurrection, 102, 103, 104.
condition in the new dispen-
sation, 220.
■ limited views of the kingdom
of God, 543, 544,546.
, ministry committed to them,
189, 191.
, power conferred on them,
100, 101.
, title given by them to the
Saviour in their Epistles, 189.
Arimathea, 439.
Ascension, 480, 481, 514, 515, 536, 537,
538, 539, 544.
Augustus Caesar, 384.
Avarice, 302, 303.
B
Baptism appointed by our Lord after
his resurrection, 66, 214.
a seal of discipleship, 634.
introductory to every new dis-
pensation, 541.
in Jordan, why? 55,
of Christ, 61, 62.
of infants, 534.
of the nation, emblematical.
Barabbas, 361, 362, 363, 364,
Barnabas, 514, 616.
Bethany, 614.
Bible, 39, 40.
Burial, 441, 442, 443.
C
Carcass, symbol employed by our Lord,
320.
Centurion, healing of his servant, 82,
83, 436.
Children dying in infancy, their safety,
197, 198, 199.
fearful responsibility of those
who are the occasion of their trans-
gressions, 199.
Christ, charges against him, 335, 336,
337.
description of him, 340, 343.
forsaken of the Father, 426, 427,
, last presentation of him to the
Jews as their King, 390, 391.
Master and Monarch of all, 299,
300
376.
•, mocking of him, 353, 373, 374,
'6.
- mystery of his person, 153, 154.
>„ „.^,^„o,.or./>oa nftf>r his resurrec-
Christ's appearances after his resurrec
tion, 471, 472, 479, 487, 498, 502— 507
ascension, 644, 545.
body, 600.
communication to his disciples,
on his last journey to Jerusalem,
226, 226, 227.
cross-bearing, 397, 398.
deposit of his spirit, 429, 430.
glorification, 648, 549, 550, 651,
66, 57.
of the Holy Ghost, 58.
with fire, 68, 59, 60.
73
241
662.
kingdom, 191, 192.
lainentation over Jerusalem, 240,
prophecy of the destruction of
Jerusalem, 242, 243.
last day of public ministry, 249.
message to his brethren, 475,
476.
mission to the people of Israel
as Son of Man, 200.
— personal ministry, 124.
nriestlv ollioe, 188.
redemption work, 190, 191, 192.
678
INDEX OF CONTENTS.
Christ's resurrection, 501).
sacrificial work typified, 47.3.
, its result, 232.
triumphal entry into Jerusa-
lem, 235, 236, 2;i7, 238, 389, 240.
work of humiliation finished,
428, 429
Christian ministry, 534.
Church, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 534,
559, 560, 561, 562.
Cleopas, 487.
, his walk to Emmaus with
Jesus, 488, 489.
-, his defective views of the ofiice
and work of Jesus, 493, 494.
-, his recognition of Jesus, 496.
Coat, typical, 413
Cohort, 371, 372.
Coinage, 278.
Complement of evidence of Christ's
universal government over the
world, 91.
Corban, 395.
Covenant, 34, 36, 38, 41, 42, 43, 44, 46,
50, 64, 189, 260, 261, 262, 282, 283.
Crown of thorns, 373, 374.
Crucifixion, 335.
D
David, 36, 153, 154, 157.
, his conceptions of the Adam of
the covenant, 94, 95, 96.
Demons, their knowledge, 91, 92.
Disciples, 195, 227, 86.
questions and impressions re-
specting the temple, the Lord's
coming, and end of the world, 310,
311, 312, 313, 314.
Dispensation of the fall, or of the king-
dom of the heavens withdrawn,
570, 571.
of Paradise, or of the king-
dom of the heavens, 570.
of the fulness of times.
571.
Divine sovereignty, 223, 224.
Dream of Pilate's wife, 359, 360.
E
Earth, grace and goodness of God beau-
tifully illustrated in its redemp-
tion, 201, 202.
quaking, 432.
Earthly relations absorbed in the per-
fect union of the Redeemer, 125,
126.
Eighth day, 515.
Elect, in what their happiness will
consist, 230, 231, 283.
Election, doctrine of, 274.
of grace, 305, 306.
Elect Church, 321, 322, 559.
, its inheritance, 560.
Elias, 178, 180, 181.
Elijah, his Ministry, 64.
Emmaus, 487.
End, a limited and an enlarged sense,
315, 316, 317.
Ephraim, 49.
Epistles, 128, 129.
Esther, Book of, 256.
Eusebius, 486.
Evangelists, 39, 116, 335.
-, moral demonstration of
their inspiration, 318, 319.
Excommunication, 205.
Faith, effects, 80.
, office of, 81.
, in its source, 81.
, its full power, 81, 144, 185, 186,
of sympathizing friends, 82, 83,
92.
-, 247 248.
False Christs, 314, 315, 320.
Fasting, 187.
Fear, exemption from, 88.
Feast of Pentecost, 552.
Females, 436.
Fig-tree withered, 2J7.
First sermon of the new dispensation,
554, 555, 666, 657.
Forgiveness, 207.
G
Gabbatha, 330.
Gideon, 45.
Golgotha, 404.
Gospel of Matthew, for whom written,
35.
, for whom pre-
served, 36.
— , effect upon those who are
called, 273.
-, effect upon those who are
chosen, 273, 274.
narrative, remarks on, 477.
Government, form of, 45, 46,
Graves, 482.
Green tree, 403.
Grotius, 400.
H
Hades, 263.
Harmony of chapters, 446 — 453.
Harvest-field, 98, 99.
Herod, 44, 47, 49, 50, 51.
the Tetrarch, 133, 134, 135, 136.
Antipas, 348, 349, 350, 351, 352,
363.
Herodians, 275, 276.
High Priest, 473.
Holy Spirit, 304.
, his work, 525.
, first outpouring, 553, 554.
Holy Ghost, 611, 512, 513.
Holiness, 564.
Horsley, Bishop, on 2 Samuel vii. 19,
pp. 95, 96.
INDEX OF CONTENTS.
579
Hosannas, 239, 240.
Hushing the tempest, 88,
Immancel, 39, 40, 41.
Incarnation, 40, 370, 454, 455, 456.
Infants, baptism of, 534.
Infidels, futility of their arguments, 524.
Infirmities, 83.
Israel, 189.
, restoration to their land, 180,
181.
Jesus, characteristic of his life, 48.
, call always effective, 97.
casting out demons, 89, 90, 91,
92.
73.
-, commencement of his ministry,
exposes the absurdity of the
Pharisees, 118, 119, 120.
fulfilling the law, 76, 77.
, genealogy, 33, 34, 35, 36.
, Immanuel, 39.
, importance of distinctions made
by him in the different relations he
sustained, 114.
Messiahship, proofs of, 33, 34.
ministry, 73.
to the Jews, 102.
— , non-assumption of his title
(Christ) during his personal min-
istry, 296, 297.
— observance of rules of human
prudence, 115.
— , offer of John to the nation, 107.
— , power of his word, 47.
— , preacher of the law, 75.
— , power over nature, 88, 89.
— , power as Son of Man and Lord
of the Sabbath illustrated, 115.
— , prerogative as Son of Man, 93.
— , prerogatives annexed to his hu-
man nature, 93, 94.
— , prerogatives of his divine nature
to be considered, 93, 94.
— , son of Joseph, 38.
— , title, Son of Man, 84, 85, 86, 90,
113, 114.
— , title, Messiah, 86.
-, worshipped, 517, 518.
John, 51, 52, 136, 137, 138, 187.
, Baptist, why so called, 52, 53.
, character, 108.
, Elias not in person, but equal to
him, 53, 54,
, eminence, 50.
, death, signifieancy and import-
ance of that event, 136, 137, 138.
, imprisonment prolonged, for what
purpose, 72, 73.
, need of Christ's baptism, 61.
, office and authority, 68, 69.
John, message of inquirv to Jesus by
his disciples, 100, 107*.
, minister of the circumcision, 66,
148.
, mystery of his person, 153.
, preacher of repentance, 64.
, why sent to the nation, 107, 108.
Jonas, 301.
Joseph of Arimathca, 438.
Judas, 100, 101, 331.
Judaism, 204.
Judgments, 264, 265.
Judged nations, 325.
K
Kennicott, Dr., on 2 Samuel vii. 19, 95.
Kings, 44, 45, 46.
Kingdom of God, 261, 262, 263.
■, law of, 297.
Kingdom of the heavens, 46, 210, 211,
343.
•, what it in-
cludes, 215, 216.
Kingdom of heaven suffereth violence,
&c., exposition, 110, 111, 112.
•, spirit of its inhab-
itants, 196.
Labottrer, 99.
Labourers in the vineyard, special use
of this parable, 223, 224.
Last days, 672.
Land, Immanuel's, 40, 41.
Law, Ecclesiastical or Canon, 207.
Law, predictive as well as preceptive,
76, 77.
Legal dispensation, 260.
Legislative sanction, 298, 299.
Leper, healing of, 80.
, typical import, 81.
, Erasmus's opinion, 81.
Levitical rites, 294, 398, 668, 569.
Lord's Prayer, j^etitions, 79.
Luke, 258.
M
Machaerus, 138.
Malefactor, 418, 419, 420.
, his prayer, 420, 421.
Man a microcosm, 213, 163.
Mark, 267, 268, 335.
Mary, the mother of our Lord, com-
mended to the care of John the
disciple, 423, 424.
Mary Magdalene at the Sepulchre, 468
—472.
-, her touch prohibited.
-, distinction conferred
472, 473.
on her, 474.
son, 474.
a representative per-
580
INDEX OF CONTENTS.
Matthew, chief object in the beginning
of his gospel, 39.
, quotations, 84.
, description of the Saviour's
tour, 98.
, citation of passage from Isa.
xlii. 1—4, 116.
Matthew, 258, 259, 335.
Melchizedec, 232.
, his priesthood, 233, 234,
235.
Messiah, his kingdom, 325.
, 378, 379, 402.
Military guard on watch, 481, 482, 483,
484, 485.
Millennium, 574, 575.
Miracles, 48, 69, 70, 74, 75, 80, 85, 91,
97, 98, 100, 117, 118, 132, 133, 139,
140, 141, 142, 143, 558, 564, 565, 148,
149, 151, 152.
Miraculous darkness, 425, 426.
evidence insufficient to beget
faith, 523, 524,
powers. The actual condi-
tion of the Apostles in respect to
them, during our Lord's personal
ministry, 182, 183, 184.
Modern Jews, 378.
Money changers, 243, 244.
Mount of Olives, 544, 545.
Mysteries of Christ's nature, 87, 88.
, his person, 153.
N
Nation's hope, 37.
Nation to whom the kingdom shall be
given, 262, 263.
Nations, distress of, 322, 323.
National conversion of Israel — views
of, 568, 569.
Nicodemus, 441, 442.
0
Oaths, 77.
Oflfences, 202, 203.
Omniscience, 522.
Palace, 339.
Palingenesia, 213.
Parables divided into public and pri-
vate instruction, 126, 127.
belonging to the category of
public instruction, 127.
belonging to the category of
private instruction, 131.
of the two sons, 252, 253.
of the vineyard, 255.
, its great lesson, 259, 260, 261.
of the Marriage, 266—274.
, interpretation of it furnishes
a motive for Missions, 271, 272.
of the ten virgins, 332.
Peace — "Let your peace," Ac, 102.
Pentecostal gifts, 548.
Persecutors, 360, 361.
Personal reign, 218, 219.
Peter, 173, 462, 467, 497, 528, 529, 530.
, change wrought in his mind by
the Holy Spirit, 657.
, his confession of Christ, 156,
157, 165.
, supremacy over the other Apos-
tles— argument against, 158.
, first sermon, 554, 655, 556.
, its efiect upon the people, 557,
558.
Pharisees, 115, 293, 294, 295, 300, 302,
303, 304, 305.
Pilate, 331, 380, 381, 382, 383, 393, 439,
440, 485, 486.
, his character, 339.
, his sin, 340, 384, 385, 386.
, hisopinionof the charge against
Jesus, 341.
, his ignorance of the nature,
glory, and extent of our Lord's
kingdom, 342.
-, his astonishment at the silence
of Jesus, 348, 349.
— , his probable motive in sending
Jesus to Herod, 349, 350.
— , his resumption of the trial of
Jesus, 354.
— , his injustice, 355, 356, 358.
— , his consultation with the peo-
ple, 364.
— , his imprudence, 365.
— , his observance of the ceremony
of washing of hands, 367, 368.
— , his cruel treatment of Jesus,
369, 370.
— , his interruption of the execu-
tion of his own sentence, 374, 375.
— , his presentation of the Messiah
to the people, 375.
— , his rejjroach of the obstiikacy of
the Jews, 376.
— , his perplexities, 380.
— ; his inquiry of Christ as to his
origin, 380, 381.
— , his power, 382, 383, 384.
-, his convictions, 389.
Powers of the redeemed in their glori-
fied state, 89_, 86.
Power of pardoning sins, 512, 513.
Potter's field, 395.
Prajtorium, 330, 371.
Preaching, 129.
Priests' disregard of their own law of
the Sabbath, 444, 445.
Prophets, burden of, 76.
Prophecies, 494.
R
Paradise, 216.
Patriarchal economy, 572.
Rachel, 49, 51.
Rama, 49.
Redemption, 108, 208, 209.
INDEX OF CONTENTS.
581
Regeneration, 209, 213, 215, 219.
Reign of Christ, 218.
Restitution of all things, 219—223, 570,
673.
Resurrection, 280, 281, 282, 453, 454,
523.
Revelation of St. John, 328.
Roman laws, 332,
Roman custom, 409, 412, 414, 437, 438.
Roman computation of time, 414.
Rocks rending, 432.
S
Sabbath-day, 436, 444.
Sabbath-breaking, 113, 114, 115.
Sabbath-day's journey, 545.
Sadducees, 66, 279, 284, 285.
Saints (risen) 432, 433, 434.
Samaritans, 37.
Satan. 118, 119, 120, 359, 360, 370, 372,
373,386,387, 388, 399.
Saviour, important change in his pub-
lic and private discourses and mi-
racles, 137.
dividing his public ministry
into two portions, 138.
-, intercourse with his disciples,
142, 143.
, his ministry, 150.
-, mystery of his person, 153,
-, public assumption of the title
154.
of Christ, 160
— , method in the instruction of
his discii>les, 161.
Scribes, 293, 294, 300, 302, 303, 304, 305,
306.
Scourc^ing, 369, 370.
Self luumliation, 298, 299.
Sepulchre, 457 — 465.
Sheaf, typical, 515, 516.
Simon a Cyrenian, 398, 399, 400,
Sins, 207.
against the Son of Man, and
against the Holy Spirit, 121.
Solomon, 36.
Soldiers, 437, 438.
Son of Man, 104, 105, 113, 114, 164, 165,
166, 167, 168, 245,290.
Soul, its value, 163, 164.
, its consciousness in a state of sepa-
ration from the body, 421, 422.
Spirit world, 499, 500.
Spiritual natures, 471, 472.
Stone, 264.
Superscription, 409, 410,411, 412.
TEAcnER, 131, 132.
Tempest, 87, 309, 310.
Testimony, Herod's, 44.
Thomas, 519—523.
Theocracy, 45, 46, 308, 323.
Transfiguration, 165 — 175.
Tribes, 5, 45, 46, 49, 50, 221, 402.
Tribute, 193, 194, 195, 335, 336, 337.
Trinity, 378.
U
TJnfallen worlds, 210.
V
Veil of the temple, 431.
W
Whitby on second coming, 530.
Witnesses, 539.
Women at the sepulchre, 457, 458, 480,
461, 467.
World,316, 317, 343.
INDEX OF TEXTS.
MATTHEW.
PAGE
PAGE.
Chap. X. 12, 13. 14.
102
Chap. i. 1,
33
"
X. 16, 18,
103
"
1.2,
35
It
X. 23,
104
K
i. 6,
36
"
xi. i.
105
a
i. 12,
36
II
xi. 2—15,
106
i. 16,
38
"
xi. 3,
108
i. 23,
39
II
xi. 10,
109
tt
i.24.
41
II
xi. 12, 13,
110
It
i. 18—25,
42
It
xi. 25—27,
112
"
ii.
43
It
xii. 8,
113
"
ii. 2,
44
ti
xii. 9—13,
114
"
ii. 12, 13,
47
It
xii. 14, 15,
115
<(
ii. 18,
49
It
xii. 18, 19,
116
II
iii. 1, 2, 51,64,210
•'
xii. 20, 22—24
, 117
It
iii. 3,
53
II
xii. 25.
118
II
iii. 6,
64
It
xii. 26, 27,28,
119
iii. 11,
65
It
xii. 29, 31, 32,
120
iii. 12,
69
II
xii. 33,
121
It
iii. 14,
61
II
xii. 38,
122
^'
iii. 15,
62
It
xii. 43—45,
124
II
iii. 17,
63
It
xii. 46—50,
125
II
iv. 12—17,
72
It
xiii.
126
"
iv. 17,
73
It
xiii'. 24—30,
129
"
iv. 23, 24,
74
"
xiii 37—43,
130
"
V. vi. vii.
75
It
xiii. 44, 45,
131
"
V. 17, 18,
76
It
xiii. 47—61, 52
, 131
"
V. 34,
77
II
xiii. 58,
132
II
vi. 9,
78
If
xiv. 1, 2,
133
It
vi. 10,
79
II
xiv. 3,
134
viii. 2, 3,
79
II
xiv. 4, 5, 6—9,
136
"
viii. 5—13,
82
"
xiv. 10,
136
"
viii. 17,
83
"
xiv. 13, 16,
138
viii. 20,
84
II
xiv. 17, 18—21,
139
viii. 23—27,
85
It
xiv. 22—33,
141
viii. 23,
87
II
xiv. 28,
143
"
viii. 24,
87
It
xiv. 29, 30, 31,
144
It
viii. 25, 26,
88
II
xiv. 32, 33,
146
11
viii. 27,
89
II
XV. 12, 13,
147
"
viii. 28—32,
89
"
XV. 21, 22—28,
148
"
viii. 29,
91
II
XV. 30,
149
"
ix.2.
92
II
xvi. 4,
150
tt
ix. 4,
93
It
xvi. 6, 7,
151
"
ix. 9,
97
It
xvi. 13, 14,
153
ix. 18—31,
97
"
xvi. is;
156
ix. 35,36,37,38
98
It
xvi. 16,
166
X. 1.
99
"
xvi. 17,
157
X. 5, 7,
101
It
xvi. 18, 19,
168
It
X. 9, 10,
101
It
xvi. 20.
160
Chap,
PAGE.
xvi. 21, 22, 23, 161
xvi. 21—27,
xvi. 26,
xvi. 27,
xvi. 28,
xvii. I,
xvii. 2,
xvii. 4,
xvii. 9,
xvii. 10, 11,
xvii. 11,
xvii. 12,
xvii. 14 — 21,
xvii. 16,
xvii. 19, 20,
xvii. 21,
xvii. 22, 23,
162
163
164
165
169
170
173
174
176
179
177
181
181
184
186
188
xvii. 24,25,26, 193
xvii. 27,
xviii. 1,
xviii. 2, 3,
xviii. 4, 5,
xviii. 6,
xviii. 10,11,
194
195
196
197
199
200
xviii. 12, 13, 14, 201
xviii. 15, 202
xviii. 16, 17, 203
xviii. 18, 206
xviii. 21, 22, 207
xix. 24—26, 208
xix. 27, 28, 209
xix. 29, 30, 222
XX. 1—16, 223
XX. 17, 19, 225
XX. 20, 21, 227
XX. 22, 23, 228
XX. 24, 229
XX. 25—27, 230
XX. 28, 231
xxi. 1 — 11, 235
xxi. 1, 2, 236
xxi. 2, 3, 237
xxi. 4, 6, 238
xxi. 8, 9, 239
xxi. 10,11,12,13, 243
xxi. 13, 244
xxi. 16, 16, 245
xxi. 17, 246
INDEX OF TEXTS.
583
' PAGE.
Chap. xxi. 18—20, 247
xxi. 21, 247
xxi. 23, 248, 249
xxi. 24, 250
xxi. 25, 26, 251
xxi. 27, 28—31, 252
xxi. 32, 253
xxi. 33-41, 255
xxi. 37, 256
xxi. 39, 267
xxi. 42, 258
xxi. 43, 259
xxi. 44, 264
xxi. 45, 265
xxii. 266
xxii. 2, 268
xxii. 3, 4, 269
xxii. 5, 6, 270
xxii. 8, 9, 271
xxii. 10, 11—13, 272
xxii. 14, 273
xxii. 15—46, 274
xxii. 15, 16, 276
xxii. 18, 19, 277
xxii. 20, 21, 278
xxii. 23, 29, 279
xxii. 30, 280
xxii. 31, 32, 281
xxii. 35—40, 285
xxii. 41—45, 287
xxii. 46, 290
xxiii. 291
xxiii. 2, 3, 292
xxiii. 3, 4, 295
xxiii. 5—7, 8, 296
xxiii. 8—11, 297
xxiii. 12, 298
xxiii. 13—36, 300
xxiii. 13, 14, 302
xxiii. 15-31, 32-3,303
xxiii. 34— 36, 304
xxiii. 37, 306, 307
xxiii. 38, 39, 308
xxiv. 1, 309
xxiv. 2, 3, 310
xxiv. 4, 5, 314
xxiv. 6, 315
xxiv. 15, 317
xxiv. 16—22, 319
xxiv. 23—27, 319
xxiv. 26, 27, 28, 320
XXV. 46, 248
xxvii. 15, 16, 356
xxvii. 19,20, 358,360
21,
22,
24,
xxvn.
xxvii.
xxvii.
xxvii. 25,
xxvii. 27,
xxvii. 29,
xxvii. 29, 30,
xxvii. 3 — 5,
xxvii. 6, 7,
xxvii. 8, 9, 10,
361
364
367
368
371
373
374
394
394
395
Chap,
Chap.
PAGE.
xxvii. 31, 397
xxvii. 32, 398
xxvii. 33, 34, 404
xxvii. 37, 408, 409
xxvii. 35, 413
xxvii. 36, 414
xxvii. 39—43, 416
xxvii. 44, 418
xxvii. 45, 425
xxvii. 47, 427
xxvii. 48, 49, 428
xxvii. 50, 429
xxvii. 51—53, 431
xxvii. 54, 434
xxvii. 57, 438
xxvii. 58, 439
xxvii. 59, 440, 441
xxvii. 60, 61, 443
xxvii. 62-66, 443,445
xxviii. 1, 446-7, 456
xxviii. 2-4,447,458
xxviii. 5, 6, 461
xxviii. 7, 462
xxviii.8,447,449,462
xxviii. 9, 10, 479
xxviii.8-11-15, 449
xxviii. 11, 481
xxviii. 12—14, 482
xxviii. 13, 482
xxviii. 14, 486
xxviii. 15, 485
xxviii.l6, 451-2,531
xxviii. 17,18, 531-2
xxviii. 19, 532
MARK.
iii. 13, 14, 100
ix. 14—27, 181
xi. 12-14,20,21, 247
xii. 25, 280
xii. 26, 27, 281
xii. 13—37, 274
XV. 4, 348
XV. 6, 7, 8, 356
XV. 12, 13, 364
XV. 14, 366
XV. 15, 369
XV. 16, 371
XV. 19 374
XV. 30, 397
XV. 21, 398
XV. 28, 406
XV. 26, 408
XV. 25, 414
XV. 29—32, 416
XV. 33, 425
XV. 34, 35, 426, 427
XV. 39, 434
XV. 42,43, 438
XV. 44, 45, 439
XV. 47, 443
xvi. 1, 2, 446, 447
PAGE.
" xvi. 3, 4,
453
" xvi. 5—8,
447
" xvi. 9,
448
" xvi. 10, 11,
477
Chap. xvi. 12,
486
" xvi. 14, 450-
-1, 502
" xvi. 15, 16,
533
" xvi. 17, 18,
535
Chap.
LUKE.
i. 17, 63
iii. 20, 21, 70
vi. 12, 13, 100
ix. 29, 30, 172
ix. 37—42, 181
xix. 41—44, 240
xix. 42, 241
xix. 43, 44, 242
XX. 20—44, 274
XX. 34—36, 280
XX. 37, 38, 281
xxiii. 2, 335
xxiii. 8, 350
xxiii. 9, 11, 352,353
xxiii. 13, 354
xxiii. 14, 15, 16, 355
xxiii. 18, 20, 361
xxiii. 21, 364
xxiii. 22, 23, 366
xxiii. 24, 25, 369
xxiii. 26, 398
xxiii. 27, 28, 400
xxiii. 29, 401
xxiii. 30, 31, 402
xxiii. 32, 403
xxiii. 33, 405, 406
xxiii. 34, 413, 407
xxiii. 38, 408
xxiii. 35, 414
xxiii. 36, 37, 415
xxiii. 39, 418
xxiii. 40, 41, 413
xxiii. 42, 43, 420
xxiii. 44, 425
xxiii. 46, 429
xxiii. 45, 431
xxiii. 47, 434
xxiii. 48, 435
xxiii. 51, 438
xxiii. 55, 56, 443
xxiv. 1, 2-9, 446-7
xxiv. 10,11, 449
xxiv. 12, 473
xxiv. 13, 14, 16, 487
xxiv. 12—34, 449
xxiv. 19, 488
xxiv. 1.3, 30, 31, 450
xxiv. 20, 21, 489
xxiv. 5, 6, 7, 465
xxiv. 22, 23, 489
xxiv. 24, 490
xxiv. 25, 26, 490
584
INDEX OF TEXTS.
PAGE.
Chap
xxiv. 27, 494
xxiv. 28, 29, 494
xxiv. 30, 495
xxiv. 31, 496
xxiv. 31, 32,33, 496
xxiv. 34, 497
xxiv. 35, 36, 37, 498
xxiv. 38, 39, 40, 499
xxiv. 41, 501
xxiv. 42,43, 501
xxiv. 44-49, 451,505
xxiv. 45, 607
xxiv. 46, 507
xxiv. 47, 608
xxiv. 48, 609
xxiv. 49, 511
xxiv. 50,51,451,513
xxiv. 51—53, 616
xxiv. 52, 617
xxiv. 63, 618
JOHN.
Chap.
i. 22, 23, 66
i. 25, 67
X. 41, 69
xviii. 29, 330
xviii. 31. 32, 334
xviii. 34, 341
xviii. 36, 342, 344
xviii. 37,
xviii. 39,
xviii. 40,
xix. 1,
xix. 3, 4,
343
357
361
369
374
Chap. X
X. 5, 6,
X. 6, 7,
X. 8, 9,
X. 9, 10,
X. 11,
X. 12,
X. 13,
X. 16,
X. 17,
X. 19,
PAGE.
375
376
380
381, 382
383, 384
389
390
393, 396
397
408, 409
X. 20— 22, 410,411
X. 23,
X. 23, 24,
X. 25,
X. 26, 27,
X. 28,
X. 29,
X. 30,
412
413
422
423
427
428
428, 429
X. 31—37, 436
X. 38, 438,439
X. 39, 40, 440,441
xix. 41, 42,
XX. 1, 2,
XX. 3, 4,
XX. 5, 6, 7, 8,
XX. 3—10,
XX. 9, 10, 12,
XX. 11, 13, 448, 469
XX. 14, 448, 470
XX. 15, 448, 470
XX. 16, 471
XX. 17, 448, 472, 475
XX. 18, 449, 476
XX. 19, 603
XX. 21, 610
XX. 22, 610
Chap
XX. 23,
XX. 24,
XX. 26,
XX. 27,
XX. 29,
xxi. 1,
xxi. 14,
xxi. 15
xxi. 17,
xxi. 20,
xxi. 23,
PAGE.
512
619, 520
451,520
522
522
452, 525
528
1,16,
18, 19,
21,22,
528
629
529
630
Chap.
ACTS.
.3,4,
540
1. 4, 5,
642
• 5,
541
1.6,
542, 643
•7,
543
I. 9, 12,
544
. 13, 14,
546
i.
548
• 1,
652
i. 2, 3, 4.
552
i. 14—36,
554
i. 37, 42,
557
i. 43,
558
i.47.
659
ii.
563
ii. 12,
564
ii. 1.3,
564
ii. 16,
566
ii. 17, 19-
-21, 567
ii. 21,
669
lii. 22, 23,
574
BS2555 .J775
Notes on Scripture...
Princeton Theological Seminary-Speer Library
2087OC„ 147
J'-'3-«7 32iB0 MC