elders of the Jewish nation assented to the truth of what Tertullus said, and affirmed that things were as he had represented them ; or should I express myself as a learned gentleman has done concerning those words of the Jews to our Saviour, We never were in bondage to any mand, "There is no relying upon the words of such men as thesee," I think these gentlemen could have nothing to object. If the Jews are inconsistent with themselves, or not the strictest adherers to truth in their assertions, have not I the same liberty to suppose them guilty of varying from the truth in the saying now before us, as others have in such sayings of theirs as they apprehend contradictory to this?

However, there is not the least occasion for such answers as these. It sufficiently appears from the context itself, that the meaning of this saying of the Jews could not be that they were by the Romans deprived of the liberty of judging men by their law, and putting them to death. It is remarkable, that as Pilate says to the Jews in the words immediately before, Take ye him, and judge him according to your law; so the evangelist adds, in the words immediately following, that the saying of Jesus might be fulfilled, which he spake, signifying what death he should die. Our blessed Lord had not only prophesied that he should die a violent death, but had named the manner of his death, which was crucifixion; and that, in order hereunto, he should be betrayed into the hands of the chief priests and Scribes, who should pronounce him wor

c Acts xxiv. 1-9. d John viii. 33. e Lard. Cred. vol. 1. P. 93. f Matt. xvii. 22, 23. Mark ix. 31.

thy of death, and then deliver him to the Gentiless. The evangelist John expressly observes, that by the phrase of his being lifted up, our Lord signified what death he should die h. He in this place remarks the fulfilment hereof, and rests it upon the Jews refusing to judge and punish our Saviour according to their law, as Pilate directed them. Pilate said, Take ye him, and judge him according to your law. This offer the Jews reject, in saying, It is not lawful for us to put any man to death. Then the evangelist remarks, That the saying of Jesus might be fulfilled, which he spake, signifying what death he should die. It so fell out, through the overruling providence of God, that the Jews thought proper to refuse the trial of our Saviour, and persisted herein, although Pilate expressly referred it to them; and this was the true occasion of the fulfilment of our Lord's prophecy. For had he been judicially tried and condemned by the Jews, he had not been crucified. The law of Moses knew no such punishment. He might have been stoned, or strangled, or burnt, or put to death by the sword', according as the crime was for which he was condemned; but he could not have been crucified.

Taking these words, therefore, as they stand connected with the context, they are so far from proving that the Romans had deprived the Jews of the power of inflicting death on criminals, that they shew the contrary, and plainly imply, that it was in

* Matt. xx. 18, 19. The Son of man shall be betrayed unto the chief priests and unto the Scribes, and they shall condemn him to death, and shall deliver him to the Gentiles, to mock, and to scourge, and to crucify him. Ch. xxvi. 2. Luke xxiv. 6, 7.

h John xii. 32, 33.

i Vid. Mishna Sanhed. c. 7.

their option whether they would try Jesus themselves, or deliver him to be tried by the governor. For their answer is most evidently a refusal of the governor's offer, referring Jesus to be tried by themselves; and by this refusal of theirs came to pass the fulfilment of our Saviour's prophecy. If we interpret the words in any other way, we destroy the connection, and make little or no sense of what goes before, or else of what follows after. Would Pilate say to the Jews, Take ye him, and judge him according to your law, if they had not the power to inflict the penalty their law prescribed? This would be mere mockery. And indeed so it is understood by some; as though Pilate in these words, by a severe sarcasm, put the Jews in mind of the power they had lost. But how then will the latter sentence cohere, that the saying of Jesus might be fulfilled, &c.?

Let us take it for granted that Pilate makes himself merry with the impotence of the Jewish nation when he bids them take Jesus, and judge him according to their law. The answer of the Jews then, we must suppose, is a serious reply hereto : "Why do you taunt us with our want of power? "You well know that you Romans have by force

66

deprived us of our judicatories in all capital causes, "and made it unlawful for us to put any man to "death." In this case how will follow what is added by the evangelist, that the saying of Jesus might be fulfilled, signifying what death he should die? Does the fulfilment depend upon this answer of the Jews? Not in the least. Do they hereby re

k Scaliger. Vid. Huber. Dissert. 1. 1. c. 3. p. 15.

fuse any thing which it was in their power not to have refused? No. Do they hereby voluntarily give up Jesus into the hands of the Gentiles to be judged by them, when they might have judged him themselves? On the contrary, they declare that it was not in their power to inflict death on him or on any man; and therefore that they were constrained and forced to deliver him to the Gentiles, in order to his being judged and punished. The fulfilment of the prophecy, therefore, does not at all depend upon the reply made by the Jews to Pilate, but upon the hard condition the Romans had laid upon them in taking from them the use of their own laws. The evange

list John plainly rests the fulfilment of the prophecy upon the answer which the Jews make to Pilate; but this interpretation rests it upon a circumstance as well known before the answer was made as after. So that in truth it bears no manner of relation to the answer, nor has any connection with it.

Let us, however, proceed one step further, and take it for granted that the apostle does not mean that the fulfilment of the prophecy had any relation to the answer made by the Jews, but only to the well-known circumstance of that time, referred to or signified by this answer, viz. that the Romans had deprived the Jews of the power of inflicting death upon criminals. What will be the consequence? In truth, that the prediction, which relates the manner of our Lord's death, was no prophecy. For if it was the stated course of things at that time that the Jews could put no man to death, but were obliged to deliver up every one, whom they esteemed a malefactor deserving of death, to the Roman governor, to be punished by him, wherein lay the diffi

culty of foreseeing this? It must be observed, that we are speaking now of the prophecy only, so far as it related the manner of our Lord's death. For it is the fulfilment of this in particular that the apostle John remarks. After our Lord had foretold that he should be delivered into the hands of the chief priests and Scribes, and they should condemn him to death', if it was the known fixed method for them to deliver up malefactors to the governor, and it was the constant practice of the Romans to crucify all criminals of a low and mean condition, as it is acknowledged to have beenm, what could there be remarkable in the manner of his death? Was it any other than such, which those who were of the condition he was pleased to appear in, when taken and condemned by the Jewish rulers, had reason to expect?

What then is the meaning of the Jews, when they say, It is not lawful for us to put any man to death? I have already shewn from the context that these words contain a refusal of the offer made them by Pilate, that they should take and judge Jesus according to their own law. Something more therefore must be understood than what is expressed; and nothing, I think, can so reasonably be supplied to make the sense full, as that which regards the time when the words were spoken, being the first day of the passover week, and the preparation for the sabbath: It is not lawful for us to put any man to death this holy festival". This is the con

1 Mark x. 33. - Σάββατόν ἐστιν, οὐκ ἔξεστί σοι ἆραι τὸν κράββατον. Joan. v. Io. I would ask any, whether, if the first words, Záßßaróv doti, were left out, they could possibly misunderstand the place, and whether these words might not most easily be understood from the con

m Huber. Dissert. 1. 1. c. 3. §. 3. p. 16.