תמונות בעמוד
PDF
ePub

Mtxxvii.28.

And they stripped him, and they put on him a scarlet Jerasalem.

robe '',

John xix. 2. a purple robe,
Mtxxvi).29. And when they had platted a crown of thorns”, they

put it upon his head, and a reed in his right hand : and

they bowed the knee before him,
Mark xv.19. and worshipped him.
Mtxxvii.29. and mocked him, saying, Hail, King of the Jews.
John xix. 3. and they smote him with their hands.
Mtxxvii.30. And they spit upon him, and took the reed and smote

him on the head.
Jobo xix, 4. Pilate therefore went forth again, and saith unto them,

Behold, I bring him forth to you, that ye may know that
I find no fault in him.

other learned men, is very ingenious; but is unsupported by au-
thorities. The Jews, he observes, divided the day into four quar-
ters, as they did the night ; each consisting of three hours;
and, whatever was done within the space of one of these quar-
ters, might be reckoned to the hour at which the quarter began,
or at which it ended. The second quarter began at the third
hour, about which time it was supposed our Lord was con-
demned, and it ended at twelve; about which time he was cru-
cified. St. John mentions the time of his condemuation, St.
Mark of his crucifixion. St. John distinguishes the begiading of
the second quarter of the day by its latest term, the sixth bour;
and St. Mark the conclusion of it, by its earliest term, the
third hour. But this hypothesis appears mucb too forced to be
tenable.

(a) Vide Horne's Introd. (h) Campbell, on John xix. 14.
19 There is no greater difference between the meaning of the
words κόκκινον and πορφύρα, than there is if one English reader
should say a red robe, and another a reddish robe; or tban if
one French author should use the word rouge, and another
rougeatre.–Pilkington, notes to sect. 442.

20 Thorns were the first produce of the earth after the fall of
maq, and tbey were worn by our Lord, as a part of his punish-
ment. They were the first fruits of the curse, and were appro-
priately placed on the head of the sacred victim.

Bishop Pearce and Michaelis are of opinion that the crown of thorns was not intended to be an instrument of punishment or torture to his head, but rather to render our Lord an object of ridiculo; for which cause they also put a reed in his hand, by way of sceptre, and bowed their knees, pretending to do bim homage ; and that the crown was not probably of thorns, in our sense of the word. Mark xv. 17. and John xix. 5. term it sepavov akavdivov, which might be translated an acapthine crown, or wreath formed out of the branches of the herb acanthus, or bear's foot. This is a prickly plant, though not like thorns, in the common meaning of that word.

Doddridge, however, observes very justly on this idea, that if the soldiers wished only to insult Christ, a crown of straw would have equally answered that purpose. Unless they had intended to have added to the cruelties, it is difficult to know on what account the thorns should have been selected.

12,

Jobo xix. 5. Then came Jesus forth, wearing the crown of thorns, Jerusalem.

and the purple robe. And Pilate saith unto them, Be

hold the man !
6. When the Chief Priests therefore and officers saw him,

they cried out, saying, Crucify him, crucify him. Pilate
saith unto them, Take ye him, and crucify him: for I

find no fault in him.
7. The Jews answered him, We have a law, and by our

law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of

God.
8. When Pilate therefore heard that saying, he was the

more afraid ;
9. And went again into the judgment-hall, and saith unto

Jesus, Whence art thou? But Jesus gave him no answer".
10.

Then saith Pilate unto him, Speakest thou not unto
me ? knowest thou not that I have power to crucify thee,

and have power to release thee?
11. Jesus answered, Thou couldest have no power at all

against me, except it were given thee from above: there-
fore he that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin.

And from thenceforth Pilate sought to release him: but
the Jews cried out, saying, If thou let this man go, thou
art not Cesar's friend : whosoever maketh himself a king,

speaketh against Cesar.
13. When Pilate therefore heard that saying, he brought

Jesus forth, and sat down in the judgment seat in a place

that is called the Pavement, but in the Hebrew, Gabbatha. 14.

And it was the preparation of the passover, and about
the sixth hour : and he saith“ unto the Jews, Behold

your King!
15. But they cried out, Away with him, away with him,
crucify him.

Pilate saith unto them, Shall I crucify your
King ? The Chief Priests answered, We have no king

but Cesar.
16. Then delivered he him therefore unto them to be cru-
cified.

MATT. xxvii. part of ver. 26, 27.
26 Then released he Barabbas unto them; and wben he had
scourged Jesus, he delivered him-

27 ---and gathered unto him the whole band.
MARK XV. part of ver. 15, 16. ver. 17, 18. and part of ver. 19.

15 -released Barabbas onto them delivered Jesus-to be
crucified.

16 - the soldiers into the hall

17 And they clothed him with purple, and platted a crown of thorns, and put it about his head;

[ocr errors]

21 Our Lord would not reveal his dignity to Pilate, because he would not have believed him, and because as a judge Pilate was only concerned with his innocence : noither had the time come,

for an appeal to the Gentiles.

18 And began to salute him, Hail, King of the Jews !

Jerusalem.
19 And they smote him on the head with a reed, and did spit
upon him-bowing their knees

JORN xix. ver. 2. and part of ver. 3.
2 And the soldiers platted a crown of thorns, and put it on
his bead, and ey put on him a purple robe,

3 And said, Hail, King of the Jews!-

SECTION XVI.

Christ is led away from the Judgment-Hall of Pilate to

Mount Calvary.
MATT. xxvii. 31, 32. MARK XV. 20, 21. LUKE xxiii.

26–32. JOHN xix. part of ver. 16. and ver. 17.
Jo, xix. 16. And they took Jesus, and led him away.
Mtxxvii.31. And after that they had mocked him,
Mark xv.20. they took off the purple from him, and put his own clothes

on him, and led him out to crucify him.
Joh. xix. 17. And he bearing his cross went forth into a place called

the place of a skull, which is called in the Hebrew Gol

gotha.
Ln. xxiii.26. And as they led him away,
Mtxxvii.32. as they came out, they found a man of Cyrene, Simon by
Lu.xxiii.26. they laid hold upon one Simon, a Cyrenian",
Mar. xv.21. who passed by, coming out of the country, the father of

Alexander and Rufus
Mtxxvii.32. him they compelled to bear his cross.
Lu.xxiii.26. and on him they laid the cross, that he might bear it after

Jesus.
27.

And there followed him a great company of people, and
of women, which also bewailed and lamented him:
28. But Jesus turning unto them said, Daughters of Jeru-

naine :

22

22 By comparing these two passages we obtain one of those innumerable minor, yet important proofs of the authenticity of the Scriptures, which demonstrate the impossibility of their being forgeries. St. Luke, who wrote for the Gentiles of Asia, merely mentions the name and country of Simon, wbo was probably known to the early Christians by character. St. Mark, bowever, who addressed himself at the dictation of St. Peter (by whose name therefore this Gospel might more properly be called) to the converts at Rome, adds, that Simon was the father of Alexander and Rufus, the latter of whom being a well knowo member of the Roman Church, inquiries might be made by the people, of Rufus bimself, respecting the circum: stances of the crucifixion, wbich he in all probability would have received from his father. Rufus is saluted by St. Paul in his Epistle to the Romans (ch. xvi. 13.) which was written many years after the Gospel of St Mark.

1

salem, weep not for me, but weep for yourselves, and for Jerusalem.

your children. Lu.xxij.29. For, behold, the days are coming, in the which they

shall say, Blessed are the barren, and the wombs that

never bare, and the paps which never gave suck.
30.

Then shall they begin to say to the mountains, Fall on
us; and to the hills, Cover us.
31. For if they do these things in a green tree, what shall

be done in the dry ?
32. And there were also two other malefactors led with him
to be put to death.

MATT. xxvii. part of ver. 31, 32.
31 —they took the robe off from him, and put his own raiment
on him, and led him away to crucify hinn.
32 And

MARK XV. part of ver. 20, 21.
20 And when they bad mocked him-
21 And they compel one Simon, a Cyrenian-to bear his

cross

SECTION XVII.
Christ arrives at Mount Calvary, and is crucified.
MATT. xxvii. 33, 34. 37. MARK xv. 22, 23. 26. 28.

LUKE xxiii. 33. 38. JOHN xix. 18-22.
Mtxxvii.33. And when they were come to a place called Golgotha,

that is to say, a place of a skull, 34.

They gave him vinegar to drink mingled with gall: and

when he had tasted thereof, he would not drink. Mark xv.23.

And they gave him to drink wine mingled with myrrh: but he received it not 23.

23 The Jews always gave wine with incense in it, to stupify and intoxicate the criminal. The custom originated in the precept Prov. xxxi. 6. “ Give strong drink unto him that is ready to perish,” i. e. “ to bim who is condemned to death.” It would appear from the preceding narrative, that three potions were certainly oflered to our Lord, two when he arrived at Golgotha, Matt. xxvii. 34. apd Mark xv. 23. and the third after he had been for some time on the cross. The first draugbt, vinegar mingled with gall, was most probably offered to him in malice, and derision of his sufferings; our Lord refusing to drink of it, the intoxicating draught wbich was usual on such occasions, was then presented; but be declined tasting of either, and drank only of the third, the vinegar, or posca, the common driok of the Roman soldiers ; and which was placed in a vessel near the eross, for their accommodation.

He was faint and exhausted in body, and though his powers of miod were the same, he required that his humanity should receive the refreshment proffered to bim by the bystander.

Altbougb, as we have seen, there appears no difficulty or discrepancy in the accounts of St. Matthew and St. Mark, Mi. chaelis does not hesitate to assert, that there exists a manifest contradiction. He has consequently endeavoured by conjecture to reconcile the supposed difference, and has bad the singular misfortune to be reluted by himself, hy his editor Bishop

Lu.xxiji.33, And when they were come to the place which is called Jerusalen.

Calvary, there they crucified him, and the malefactors,
one on the right hand, and the other on the left.

,הלא he took it for-חליא translator overlooked the yod • in

Marsh, wh has substituted an equally untenable conjecture,
and lastly, by the critic of both, Archbishop Lawrence. After
comparing the two accounts of St. Matthew and St. Mark, Mi-
chaelis decides that St. Mark bas given the correct history, and
that St. Matthew's Gospel, which was originally written in
Hebrew, was wrongly translated into Greek.

He supposes
that the words used in the Hebrew Gospel of St. Matthew,
were such as agreed with the account given by St. Mark, and at
the same time were capable of the construction wbich was put
ou them by St. Matthew's Greek translator. Suppose St. Mat-
thew wrote kry mobn, which signifies sweet wine with bitters,
or sweet wine and myrrb, as we find it in Mark; and Matthew's

, which signifies vinegar, and bitter, he translated by xoan, as it is often rendered in the Septuagint. Nay, St. Matthew, he proceeds, may have written resn, and have still meant to express “sweet wine;" if so, the difference only consisted in the points; for the same word, which, when pronounced "ball,” signifies “sweet,” denotes as soon as it is pronounced bala,“ vinegar." The translator of St. Matthew's Gospel misunderstood the words of the original, but St. Mark has given the true account.

In this criticism, Michaelis may be considered as having refuted himself; for he tells us, p. 151, that as the Hebrew original of St. Matthew is lost, a comparison can never be iustituted between that and the Greek version : and this comparison ALONE can decide the question if there is any variation between them. It must be observed in answer, it is not possible to ascertain certainly whether St. Matthew wrote in Hebrew or not.

Bishop Marsh bas remarked, that the proposed Chaldee read-
ing of Michaelis cannot possibly have given rise to the expression
in St. Mark's text: neither is the construction of roynt correct.
Having pointed out the weakness of the other parts of Michaelis's
criticism, the learned Bishop bas proposed a similar elucidation
upon the same principle of conjecture. He supposes that the

, ,
means wine, was confused with xxnn, vinegar; and likewise
*710, myrrh, with xinn, gall. In refutation of these hypotheses
Archbishop Lawrence observes--this strange confusion of words,
whether attributable to a transcriber or translator, is greater
than seems likely to have happened. Aware of the objection,
Bishop Marsh, afterwards proposes another illustration, and
presumes that the Chaldec text ran thus xiva O'da yon, which
may be rendered vinum conditum myrrha. Yet he adds, that
as hon, when a participle, has the signilication of turbidum fieri,
as well as that of vinum, when a substantive : and as a'da, when
a substantive, means acetum, as well as conditum, when a parti-
ciple, upon this construction the words may be translated ace-
tum turbatum felle, still supposing, as in the preceding instance,

. With respect however to this sug.
gestion (says Archbishop Lawrence) may it not be fairly ques-
tioned whether O'da in ancient Chaldee really

signifies vinegar. No such meaning is affixed to it in Buxtorf's Lexicon Chaldaic et Syriac, nor in the Syrochald. Diction. annexed to the Antwerp Bible. In the elder Buxtorf's Lexicon Chaldaic Talmu. dic et Rabbinic: this sense is indeed given to it; nevertheless, not as the ancient Chaldee sepse, but as one of a more recept

.מררא to be mistaken for מורא

« הקודםהמשך »