Coke's Commentary on the Holy Bible · Matthew 第27章

Matthew 27:3. Then Judas—repented himself, &c.— St. Matthew introduces this account of the fate of Judas, as we see, immediately after the Jews had delivered Jesus to Pilate; but after this the Jews must have been so intent on persuadingPilate to consent to his death, that there was hardly time for the Sanhedrim's adjourning to the temple where this occurrence happened, before they had prevailed with Pilate to condemn him; and as Judas must have often heard his Master say that he should be crucified, Pilate's order for his execution must have more sensibly affected him, than the Jews passing sentence on him; as they had not then the power of putting any one to death; and therefore this event, most probably, happened immediately after the condemnation of Jesus by Pilate. The word τοτε, then, with which the Evangelist begins this history, may be taken in some latitude, to introduce the mention of an occurrence which happened about that time, whether a little before or after, and need not be interpreted with so much rigour, as to determine it to an assertion of observing the exactest order in all circumstances. See Doddridge, Gerhard, &c. Dr. Macknight however is of a different opinion; "Because," says he, "Judas cast down this money in the temple, it is thought that the council adjourned thither, before they carried Jesus to the governor, and that Judas found them there; but they were too much in earnest to delay their revenge one moment; besides, they had now no time to spend in the temple: he might come to the priests immediately after they had condemned his Master, while they were yet in the high priest's palace; or he might accost them as they were passing along the street to the praetorium; or he might find them standing before the praetorium; into which they would not enter, lest they should be defiled: this latter seems to be the true supposition; for the historian insinuates, that Judas addressed the priests, after they had carried Jesus to the governor. When they refused the money, he left them, and went to hang himself; but taking the temple in his way, he threw down the whole sum in the treasury, or that part of the women's court where the chests were placed for receiving the offerings of the people who came to worship. This money mightbe gathered up by the Levite porters, who always waited at the gates of the temple, (1 Chronicles 26:0.) and might be carried by them to the priests, with an account how they got it."

return to '

Matthew 27:5. And went and hanged himself— When Judas found that he could not prevent the horrid effects of his treachery, his conscience lashed him more furiously than before, suggesting thoughts which by turns made the deepest wounds in his soul. His Master's innocence and benevolence, the usefulness of his life, the favoursthat he had received from him, with many other considerations, crowded into his mind, and racked him to such a degree, that his torment became intolerable. Wherefore, unable to sustain the misery of those agonizing passions and reflections, he makes a full confession of his Master's innocence, returns the wages of iniquity, and goes and hangs himself. St. Peter seems to give a different account of the traitor's death:—Falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out, Acts 1:18. And to reconcile the two passages, Tob 3:10 is commonly brought to prove that the word απηγξατο, in St. Matthew, may signify suffocation with grief, in consequence of which a man's bowels may gush out; and instances are cited from Virgil, Eclogue Matthew 7:26.:

Invidia rumpantur ut ilia Codro. and from Josephus, Antiq. 15. 100: 13 where one Zenodorus is mentioned, who is supposed to have died in this manner. The Talmudists make such a suffocation the punishment usually inflicted by God upon such persons as bore false witness against their neighbour. But as the above-quoted instances may be otherwise understood, it is more natural to suppose that Judas hanged himself on some tree growing out of a precipice, and that the branch breaking, or the knot of the rope wherewith he hanged himself opening, he fell down headlong, and dashed himself to pieces, so that his bowels gushed out. St. Peter's phrase, ελακησε μεσος, he burst asunder, favours this conjecture; for ληκεω signifies properly lacero cum strepitu, to rend or tear with a noise or cracking, and so may imply that Judas burst asunder by falling from an height. See Le Clerc, Grotius, and Wetstein. Thus perished Judas Iscariot the traitor,—a miserable example of the fatal influence of covetousness and worldly passions, and a standing monument of the divine vengeance, fit to deter future generations from acting contraryto conscience through love of the world; for which this unhappy wretch betrayed his Master, Friend, and Saviour, and cast away his own soul!

return to '

Matthew 27:11. And Jesus stood, &c.— See John 18:29; Joh 18:40 and Luk 23:2 for a more full account of our Saviour's appearance before Pilate.

return to '

Matthew 27:14. And he answered him to never a word, &c.— Jesus made no reply to the heavycharges laid against him; nay, he continued mute, notwithstanding the governor expressly required him to speak in his own defence. See Isaiah 53:7. A conduct so extraordinaryin such circumstances, astonished Pilate exceedingly; for he had good reason to be persuaded of Christ's innocence. Indeed his humble appearance was a sufficient refutation of the charge which the Jews brought against him; and his silence servedinsteadofthemostelaboratedefence;andpossibly Jesus might decline making any public defence, lest the common people, moved by what he must have said, should have asked his release, and prevented his death; in which respect, he has shewn his followers a noble example of courage and submission to the divine

return to '

Matthew 27:15. Now at that feast, &c.— Pilate had already sent Jesus to Herod, having learned that he belonged to Galilee; and Herod had sent him back to him. Luke 23:6-11. At former passovers the governor had courted the favour of the people, by gratifying them with the pardon of any one prisoner whom they pleased. There was no law to oblige him to this; but as acts of grace are generally popular things, this seems to have been first freely used by the Romans, to please their tributaries, and now by custom was in a manner established.

return to '

Matthew 27:16. A notable prisoner— A notorious criminal. Heylin. It seems he was the head of the rebels; (see John 18:40. Luke 23:19; Luke 23:25.) the ringleader of a sedition, in which murder had been committed.

return to '

Matthew 27:18. (For he knew that for envy they had delivered him.) Pilate had probably heard of the stir made by the rulers on this occasion; and, as a prudent magistrate, could not but have inquired into the reason of it. The modesty with which Jesus appeared before him, must have given credit to the report that he had received; and theconfidence which Jesus placed in his innocence, by not replying to any charge that was brought against him, might have been sufficient to convince Pilate,that there was no fault in him. Nicodemus, or Joseph of Arimathea, might have been consulted by Pilate at the first appearance of the tumult; for Joseph of Arimathea most probably was personally acquainted with Pilate, as may be inferred from his going to him to beg the body of Jesus. We can have no doubt of their being acquainted, if Joseph was one of the council who assisted Pilate in managing the affairs of his province, and particularlyin judging causes. All governors of provinces had a council of this kind. Accordingly we find it mentioned, Act 25:12 by the name of Συμβουλιον . It is objected to Joseph's being a member of Pilate's council, that it was composed of Romans only; yet even on this supposition he might be a member of it, since he might have enjoyed the privileges of a Roman citizen, as well asSt. Paul. What other reason can be assigned for his being called Βουλητης, a counsellor, Luk 23:50 and an honourable counsellor? Mark 15:43 a name not commonly given to the members of the Sanhedrim, whose proper title was αρχοντες, rulers. Further, St. Luke tells us, Luk 23:51 that Joseph did not consent to the counsel (Βουλη ) and deed of them; that is to say, he did not agree to the advice which the governor's council gave, when they desired him to gratify the Jews. See Macknight, Grotius, and Lardner's Credibility, b. 1 Chronicles 2:0.

return to '

Matthew 27:19. When he was set down, &c.— Or, While he was sitting on, &c. While Rome was governed by a commonwealth, it was unusual for the governors of provinces to take their wives with them; but afterwards it grew customary, and the motion made against it in the fourth year of Tiberius was rejected with some indignation. This circumstance ascertains the time of the event, and affords a strong proof of the veracity of the sacred historian. Possibly the word σημερον, rendered this day,may imply, that she had dreamed these things that morning, since Pilate rose; and as the heathens imagined those dreams most significant which came about break of day, she might on that account lay the greater stress upon them. Jansenius thinks, and very probably, that she had now a representation or foresight of those calamities which afterwards befel Pilate and his family. Josephus assures us, that Pilate, having slain a considerable number of seditious Samaritans, was deposed from his government by Vitellius, and sent to Tiberius at Rome, who died before he arrived there. And Eusebius tells us, that quickly after having been banished to Vienne in Gaul, he laid violent hands upon himself, falling on his own sword. Agrippa, who was an eye-witness to many of his enormities, speaks of him in his oration to Caius Caesar, as one who had been a man of the most infamous character. The words δικαιω εκεινω, would be rendered more properly, that just or righteous one.

return to '

Matthew 27:23. Why, what evil hath he done?— So bent were the chief-priests and elders to have Jesus put to death, that though the governor urged them again and again to desire his release, declaring his innocence, and offering there several times to dismiss him, they would not hear him; to such a pitch was their enmity carried against the Lord of life! They insisted upon his crucifixion, as being the most ignominious death; they insisted upon his being sentenced to this death by a Roman governor; and among the Romans it was inflicted only upon the vilest of slaves. To have inflicted such a punishment as this upon any free Jew, would probably have been sufficient to have thrown the whole city and nation into an uproar. But now they were deaf to every thing but the clamour of passion; and in their madness forgot with how dangerous a precedent they might furnish the Roman governor: and indeed it turned dreadfully on themselves, when such vast numbers of them were crucified for their opposition to the Romans during the time of their last war. See on Mat 27:25 and Inferences on ch. 24:

return to '

Matthew 27:24. Pilate—took water, &c.— It is well known that the Jews in some cases were appointed to wash their hands, as a solemn token that they were not themselves concerned in a murder committed by some unknown person. See Deuteronomy 21:6-9. In allusion to which law the Psalmist says, I will wash mine hands in innocency, that is to say, in testimony of my innocence. But as this was also a rite which was frequently used by the Gentiles in token of innocence, it is more probable that Pilate, who was a Gentile, did it in conformity to them. He thought possibly, by this avowal of his resolution to have no hand in the death of Christ, to have terrified the populace; for one of his understanding and education could not but be sensible that all the water in the universe was not able to wash away the guilt of an unrighteous sentence. The following lines of Ovid may be justly applied to Pilate:

Ah! nimium faciles, qui tristia crimina caedis Fluminea tolli posse putetis aqua! Fast. l. ii. v. 45. Ah! ye easily self-deceived, who fondly imagine that you can wash away the horrid guilt of murder with the water of the stream!

return to '

Matthew 27:25. His blood be on us, &c.— As this terrible imprecation was dreadfully answered in the ruin so quickly brought on the Jewish nation, and the calamities which have since pursued that wretched people, in almost all ages and countries; so it was peculiarly illustrated in the severity with which Titus, merciful as he naturally was, treated the Jews whom he took during the siege of Jerusalem; of whom Josephus himself writes, that μαστιγουμενοι ανεσταυρουντο, having been scourged, and tortured in a very terrible manner, they were crucified, in view and near the walls of this city, (perhaps, among other places, on mount Calvary; and it is probable that this might be the fate of some of those very persons who now joined in this cry, as it undoubtedly was of many of their children.) For Josephus, who was an eye-witness, expressly declares, "That the number of those thus crucified was so great that there was not room for the crosses to stand by each other, and that at last they had not wood enough to make crosses of:" a passage which, especially when compared with the verse before us, must impress and astonish the attentive reader beyond any other in the whole history. If this were not the very finger of God, pointing out their crime in crucifying his Son, it is hard to say what could deserve to be called so. Elsner has abundantly shewn, that among the Greeks, the persons on whose testimony others were put to death, used by a very solemn execration to devote themselves to the divine vengeance, if the persons so condemned were not really guilty. See his Observat. vol. 1: p. 123. Joseph. War, lib. 5. 100: 11 and Doddridge. Bishop Fleetwood observes, that the modern Jews are as virulent against the name of Jesus, as their fathers were against his power; so that they suffer as their fathers did, and for a like reason.

return to '

Matthew 27:26. And when he had scourged Jesus— The Romans usually scourged the criminals whom they condemned to be crucified: this was the reason why Pilate ordered our Lord to be scourged, before he delivered him to the soldiers to be crucified. St. Matthew and St. Mark insinuate, that the scourging was performed on the pavement; for they tell us that, after it was over, the soldiers took Jesus into the praetorium, and mocked him; we may therefore suppose that the priests and the multitude required the governor to scourge him openly in their sight, and that he, to pacifythem, consented, contrary to his inclination; which, as he believed Jesus to be innocent, must have led him to shew him all the favour in his power; and probably he thought that this previous punishment would have excited the pity of the Jews, and have prevented the crucifixion of Jesus. See Elsner and Wetstein.

return to '

Matthew 27:28. And they—put on him a scarlet robe— St. Mark says, they cloathed him with purple; but the ancients gave the name of purple to all colours which had any mixture of red in them. This was probably some old purple robe which they put upon him in derision of his claim to the kingdom of Judea, purple being worn by kings and great personages. See Braunius, de Vestit. Sacerd. 50: 1. 100: 14.

return to '

Matthew 27:29. And when they had platted a crown of thorns— Though it is unquestionable that they intended hereby to expose our Lord's pretended royalty to ridicule and contempt, as well as by the purple robe and mock sceptre; yet had that been all, a crown of thorns alone might have served as well. They meant, without all doubt, to add cruelty to their scorn, which especially appeared in their striking him on the head, to drive the horrid thorns into the tender parts of his temples, when this crown was put on. If the best descriptions of the Eastern thorns are to be credited, they are much larger than any commonly known in these parts. Hasselquist, speaking of the naba, or nabka of the Arabians, says, "In all probability this is the tree which afforded the crown of thorns put on the head of Christ; it grows very common in the East, and the plant is extremely fit for the purpose, for it has many small and most sharp spines, which are well adapted to give great pain. The crown might be easily made of these soft, round, and pliant branches; and what in my opinion seems to be the greatest proof of it is, that the leaves much resemble those of ivy, as they are of a very deep green: perhaps the enemies of Christ would have a plant somewhat resembling that with which emperors and generals were used to be crowned, that there might be calumny even in the punishment." It has been observed, that the curse inflicted on our first parents included thorns as the product of the earth, and this curse was put an end to, by the thorns here used. See Solomon's Song, Song of Solomon 2:2. The word καλαμος, does indeed sometimes signify a slender reed, (ch. Mat 11:7 Matthew 12:20; Matthew 3:0 John, Matthew 27:13.) but it also includes all kinds of canes, and it is most probable that this was a walking cane, which they put into his hand as a sceptre; for a blow with a slight reed would scarcely have been felt, or have deserved mention in a detail of such dreadful sufferings. See Hasselquist's Travels, p. 288 and Doddridge.

return to '

Matthew 27:31. They took the robe off from, &c.— It is not said that they took the crown of thorns off his head, which served to gratify their passions both of malice and contempt: probably our Lord died wearing it, that the title which was written over him might be better understood. It was a Jewish custom in the time of Moses to execute delinquents without the camp; but after Jerusalem was built, they were executed without the city walls. Dr. Lardner has abundantly proved by many quotations, that it was customary not only for the Jews, but also for the Sicilians, Ephesians, and Romans, to execute theirmalefactors without the gates of the cities. See Heb 13:12-13 and Lardner's Credibility, part, 1: vol. 1.

return to '

Matthew 27:32. And as they came out, &c.— We learn from the other Evangelists, that our blessed Lord had borne his cross agreeable to the custom in executions, at his first setting out. It was not indeed the whole cross which criminals carried, but only that transverse piece of wood to which the arms were fastened, and which was called antennae, or furca, going cross the stipes, or upright beam, which was fixed in the earth; the criminal, from carrying this, was called furcifer. Our blessed Lord, through the fatigue of the preceding night, spent wholly without sleep, the agony that he had undergone in the garden, his having been hurried from place to place, and obliged to stand the whole time of his trial, the want of food, and the loss of blood which he had sustained, was become so faint, that he sunk beneath the burden, and was not able to bear the weight of the cross. The soldiers therefore (for among the Romans the execution of criminals was performed by them) meeting with Simon of Cyrene, a town of Africa abounding with Jews, seized on him, probably bythe instigation of the Jews, and compelled himto carry the cross after Jesus. Simon's sons, Alexander and Rufus, were two noted men among the first Christians, at the time St. Mark wrote his Gospel. See Mark 15:21. The soldiers, however, did not remove the cross out of compassion to Christ; but from an apprehension of his dying by theexcessive fatigue, and thereby eluding the public punishment to which they were escorting him; or to prevent delay. See Lipsius de Cruce, and Bishop Pearson on the Creed, p. 203

return to '

Matthew 27:33. A place called Golgotha— A Syriac word, which signifies a skull or head. In Latin it is called Calvary: the place was so named, either because malefactors used to be executed there, or because the charnel house, or common repository for bones and skulls, might have been there. See Mark 15:22.

return to '

Matthew 27:34. They gave him vinegar to drink mingled with gall— It was usual to give criminals, before they suffered, a stupifying potion to render them insensible of the ignominy and pain of their punishment; but our blessed Lord, because he would bear his sufferings, howeversharp, not by intoxicating and stupifying himself, but through the strength of patience, fortitude, and faith, refused to drink of it. St. Mark says, they gave him to drink wine mingled with myrrh, Ch. Matthew 15:23. But the two Evangelists speak of the same ingredients: for though St. Mark terms that wine, which St. Matthew calls vinegar; he may have really meant vinegar, which was a common drink among the ancients, (see Numbers 6:3.) and such as might very properly be called wine, in regard that it was usually made of wine, or of the juice of grapes; besides, it is well known that the ancients gave the general name of wine to all fermented liquors: it is evident therefore that to reconcile the Evangelists here, we have no occasion for the reading of Beza's copy, which has οινον instead of οξος. Οξος might be rendered sour wine, as indeed the word vinegar properly imports; and this mixed with water was the common drink of the Roman soldiers, and consequently was in a vessel at hand. As to the other ingredient of this potion, let it be observed, that the word χολη in the LXX, is often used as the translation of the Hebrew word ראשׁ rosh; which properly was the name of a poisonous herb common in those countries, and remarkable for its bitterness; hence an infusion of it is called υδωρ πικρον, bitter water, Jer 23:15 and υδωρ χολης, the water of bitterness, Jeremiah 8:14; Jeremiah 9:15. Probably it was a weak infusion of this herb in vinegar and water, which our Lord's friends offered him, (as we have observed was usual on such occasions) to make him insensible, and to shorten his life. It is called indeed by St. Mark εσμυρνισμενον οινον, myrrhed vinegar, perhaps because it had myrrh mixed with it, there being nothing more common than for a medicine compounded of many ingredients, to take its name from some one of them which is prevalent in the composition. That myrrh was proper in a potion of this kind has been shewn by Vossius; who proves from Dioscorides, lib. 2. 100. 70 that frankincense, macerated in liquors, makes those who drink them mad; and that if the quantity taken be large, it sometimes produces death. Hence, when Ptolemy Philopater designed to engage his elephants, "He gave them wine mingled with frankincense, to enrage them." The Evangelists may be reconciled more directly still, by supposing that χολη signifies any bitter drug whatsoever; for it is applied to wormwood, Pro 5:4 and by parity of reason may denote myrrh, which has its name from a Hebrew word signifying bitterness. Casaubon has given a third solution of this difficulty; he thinks that our Lord's friends put a cup of myrrhed wine into the hands of one of the soldiers to give it to Jesus; but that he, out of contempt, added gall to it. See the note on Psalms 69:21. Lipsius de Milit. Rom. and Wetstein.

return to '

Matthew 27:35. And they crucified him, and parted his garments, &c.— This was the custom of the Romans; the soldiers performing the office of executioners, divided among them the spoils of the criminals. There was only Christ'stunick which they did not divide, but cast lots to see whose it should be. See John 19:23-24. They also used to appoint a guard, to watch by the crucified persons, that nobody might come and take them away, Matthew 27:36. Respecting the inscription Mat 27:37 which was also a Roman custom, we shall speak, when we come to John 19:19., &c.

return to '

Matthew 27:38. Then were there two thieves crucified with him— They placed Jesus in the middle, by way of mock honour, because he had called himself a king, and was now crowned with thorns; or, if the priests had any hand in this, they might design hereby to impress the spectators with the thought of his being an impostor, and to make them look upon him as the chief malefactor: by thieves may be meant here persons concerned in an insurrection, perhaps confederates with Barabbas: for the Greek word signifies those who take up arms, without commission or authority of a superior; and such, by the Roman laws, were subject to crucifixion. See Mar 15:28 and on Matthew 27:44.

return to '

Matthew 27:44. The thieves also—cast the same in his teeth— Reproached him in like manner. St. Luke says, that one only of the thieves reproached him. See Luke 23:39-40. Some commentators endeavour to remove this difficulty, by supposing that both the thieves might revile Jesus at first; but this solution is not very probable. The phrase is a Hebraism, it being very common in that language to express a single thing in the plural number, especially when it is not the speaker's or writer's intention to be more particular. Thus, Jdg 12:7 then died Jephtha the Gileadite, and was buried in the cities of Gilead; that is to say, in one of the cities of Gilead, as it is well supplied by our translators. So likewise the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews, speaking of the worthies of the Old Testament, says, they stopped the mouths of lions, they were sawn asunder; whereas the former sentence is applicable only to Daniel, and the latter to Isaiah. So that by the word thieves, both here and in St. Mark, we are to understand only one of the thieves.

return to '

Matthew 27:45. Now from the sixth hour, &c.— During the last three hours that our Lord hung on the cross, a darkness covered the face of the earth, to the great terror and amazement of the people present at his execution. This extraordinary alteration in the face of nature was peculiarly proper, while the Sun of Righteousness was in some sense withdrawing his beams from the land of Israel, and from the world; not only because it was a miraculous testimony borne by God himself to his innocence, but also because it was a fit emblem of his departure and its effects, at least till his light shone out anew with additional splendour, in the ministry of his Apostles. The Jews had been accustomed to the figurative language of the eclipse of the luminaries, as significative of some extraordinary revolution or calamity, and could hardly avoid recollecting the words of Amo 8:9-10 on this occasion. The heathens likewise had been taught to look on these circumstances as indications of the perpetration of some heinous and enormous crime; and how enormous was that now committed by the Jews! The darkness which now covered Judea, together with the neighbouring countries, beginning about noon, and continuing till Jesus expired, was not an ordinary eclipse of the sun, for that can never happen, except when the moon is about the change; whereas now it was full moon; not to mention that total darknesses, occasioned by eclipses of the sun, never continue above twelve or fifteen minutes. Wherefore it must have been produced by the divine power, in a manner that we are not able to explain. Accordingly, Luke, after relating that there was a darkness over all the earth, adds, and the sun was darkened, Luke 23:44-45. Farther, the Christian writers, in their most ancient apologies tothe heathens, affirm, that as it was full moon at the passover, when Christ was crucified, no such eclipse could happen by the course of nature. They observe also, that it was taken notice of as a prodigy by the heathens themselves. To this purpose we have still remaining the words of Phlegon the astronomer, and freed-man of Adrian, cited by Origen from his book, at the time when it was in the hands of the public;—that heathen author, in treating of the 4th year of the 202nd Olympiad, which was the 19th of Tiberius, and supposed to be the year in which our Lord was crucified, tells us, "That the greatest eclipse of the sun that ever was known, happened then; for the day was so turned into night, that the stars in the heavens were seen." See Orig. contr. Cels. p. 83. If Phlegon, as Christians generally suppose, is speaking of the darkness which accompanied our Lord's crucifixion, it was not circumscribed within the land of Judea, but must have been universal. This many learned men have believed, particularlyHuet, Grotius, Gusset, Reland, and Alphen. Another ancient writer asserts, "that walking in Heliopolis, a town of Egypt, with a studious friend, he observed this wonderful darkness, and said, that it certainly portended something extraordinary: that either the God of nature was suffering, or nature itself was about to be dissolved." Josephus, it is true, takes no notice of this wonderful phoenomenon; but the reason may be, that he was unwilling to mention any circumstance favourable to Christianity, of which he was no friend; and the Jews would, no doubt, disguise this event as much as they could, and perhaps might persuade him and others who heard the report of it at some distance of time or place, that it was only a dark cloud, or a thick mist, which the followers of Jesus had exaggerated, because it happened when their Master died. Such representations are exceedingly natural to hearts corrupted by infidelity. See Macknight, Doddridge, and Calmet's Dissertation on the subject.

return to '

Matthew 27:46. Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, &c.— A little before he expired, Jesus repeated the first verse of the 22nd Psalm, pronouncing it in the Syriac dialect, which was the common language of the country; and speaking with a loud voice, that all who stood around might hear him distinctly, and know that he was the person spoken of by David. Some would translate the words, My God, my God, to what a degree, or to what a length of time, hast thou forsaken me? Lama in the Hebrew has this signification. Accordingly St. Mark, in the parallel passage, has rendered it by εις τι . But, however translated, our Lord's words must be viewed in the same light with his prayer in the garden. For, as that prayer expressed only the feelings and inclinations of his human nature, sorely pressed down with the weight of his sufferings; so his words on the cross proceeded from the greatness of his sufferings then, and expressed the feelings of his human nature; viz. an exceeding grief at God's forsaking him, and a complaint that it was so. But as his prayer in the garden was properly tempered by the addition of the clause, yet not as I will, but as thou wilt; so his complaint on the cross may have been tempered in the same manner; perhaps byhis repeating the following third verse of the Psalm, though the Evangelists have not mentioned it particularly: for that, in the inward disposition of his mind, Jesus was perfectly resigned, even while he hung on the cross, is evident beyond all doubt, from his recommending his spirit to God in the article of death; which he could not have done, had he been discontented with the divine appointments. The sufferings which made our Lord cry out, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? were not merely those which appeared to the spectators, viz. the pains of death which he underwent. Many of his followers have suffered sharper and more lingering bodily tortures, ending in death, without thinking themselves on that account forsaken of God; on the contrary, they both felt and expressed raptures of joy under the bitterest torments. Why then should Jesus have complained and been so dejected under inferior sufferings, as we must acknowledge them to be, if there was nothing here but the pains of crucifixion? Isthere any other circumstance in this history which leads us to think him defective in courage or patience? In piety and resignation came he behind his own Apostles? Were his views of Deity and religion more confined than theirs? Had he greater sensibility of pain than they, without a proper balance arising from the superiorityof his understanding? In short, was he worse qualifiedfor martyrdom than they? The truth is, his words on the cross cannot be accounted for, but on the supposition that he suffered in his mind pains inexpressible, inflicted on him by an immediate interposition of the power of God, the nature and intenseness of which cannot in the language of men be more justly, or more emphatically expressed, than by the metaphor of God's forsaking him. Some think that Jesus on this occasion repeated the whole 22nd Psalm; and certainly, as it is composed in the form of a prayer, it must be acknowledged, that no address could be more suitable to the circumstances wherein our Lord then was, or better adapted to impress the minds of the beholders with becoming sentiments. Nevertheless, the things mentioned by the Evangelists as next happening, were of such a kind, that they must have followed immediately upon the repetition of the first three or four verses of the Psalm. It is probable, therefore, that he stopped there. Perhaps it was not his intention to go farther; for it was the custom of the Jews, when they quoted large portions of Scripture, to mention only the firstverses or words of the passage. Such of his hearers as knew these to be the first verses of the 22nd Psalm, would easily understand that Jesus meant to apply the whole Psalm to himself. And as it contains the most remarkable particulars of our Lord's passion, being a sort of summary of all the prophesies relative to that subject, by citing it on the cross, and applying it to himself, Jesus signified, that he was now accomplishing the things therein predicted concerning the Messiah. Farther, as the Psalm is composed in the form of a prayer, by citing it at this time, Jesus also claimed of his Father the performance of all the promises that he had made, whether to him, or to his faithful people, the chiefof which are recorded in the latter part of the Psalm.

return to '

Matthew 27:47. This man calleth for Elias— Though Jesus spoke in the vulgar dialect, some of the people present did not understand him; for they fancied that he called upon the prophet Elijah to help him. Hence some have conjectured, that they were Roman soldiers who thus misunderstood Christ's words. The conjecture, however, cannot be admitted, unless these soldiers were proselytes, and had learned the language and religion of the Jews more perfectly than it is reasonable to suppose. We may therefore believe, that it was our Lord's own countrymen who gave their opinion concerning the meaning of his words; and though they misunderstood him, it may have arisen, neither from their ignorance of the language in which he spoke, nor from their hearinghim indistinctly, for he spake with a loud voice; but from their not considering that he was repeating the words of the 22nd Psalm. Others have supposed that this was the mistake of some Hellenist Jews, who did not understand the Syro-Chaldaic language. See Craddock's Harmony, part 2: p. 256 and Grotius.

return to '

Matthew 27:48. One of them—took a sponge, &c.— We have before observed, that vinegar, or a small sharp wine and water,—a mixture which was called posca,—was the common drink of the Roman soldiers. Possibly, therefore, this vinegar was set here for their use, or for that of the crucified persons, whose torture would naturally make them thirsty. See Joh 19:28-29 where we are told that they put the sponge upon hyssop, that is to say, a stalk of hyssop, called by the other Evangelists καλαμος, which signifies not only a reed or cane, but the stalk of any plant: for that this hyssop was a shrub, appears from 1Ki 4:33 where it is reckoned among the trees. They did this office to Jesus, not so much perhaps from pity, as to preserve him alive, in hopes of seeing the miracle of Elijah's descent from heaven.See the next verse.

return to '

Matthew 27:50. Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost— St. John tells us, that when our Lord had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished. "The predictions of the prophets are all fulfilled, and the redemption of the world is finished, to accomplish which I came into the world." And the other Evangelists inform us, that in speaking these words, our Lord cried with a loud voice; probably to shew that his strength was not exhausted, but that he was about to give up his life of his own accord. The Evangelists use different words in expressing our Lord's death, which our translators, notwithstanding, render in the same manner,—He yielded or gave up the ghost; St. Mark and St. Luke say, εξεπνευσε, He expired; St. John, παρεδωκε το πνευμα, He yielded up his spirit; but St. Matthew's language is most singular, αφηκε το πνευμα, He dismissed his spirit; as the same word αφιημι is used, Ch. Matthew 13:36. Mark 4:36; Mar 11:6 and elsewhere. Now this expression seems admirably to suit our Lord's words, John 10:18. No man taketh my life from me, but I lay it down of myself, &c. shewing (as did also the strong cry, which so much impressed the centurion) that he died by the voluntary act of his own mind, and in a way peculiar to himself, by which he alone of all men that ever existed could have continued alive, even in the greatest tortures as long as he pleased, or have retired from the body whenever he thought fit. Which view of the case, by the way, suggests an illustration of the love of Christ manifested in his death, beyond what is commonly observed; inasmuch as he did not use this power to quit his body as soon as ever it was fastened to the cross, leaving only an insensible corpse to the cruelty of his murderers; but continued his abode in it with a steady resolution as long as it was proper, and then retired from it with a majestyand dignity never known, or to be known in any other death; dying, if we may so express it, like the Prince of Life! See Hebrews 5:7. Doddridge, and Gerhard.

return to '

Matthew 27:51. The veil of the temple was rent, &c.— While Jesus breathed his last, the veil of the temple was miraculously rent from top to bottom; most probably in the presence of the priest who burned the incense in the holy place at the evening sacrifice; for the ninth hour, at which Jesus expired, was the hour of offering that sacrifice. The sudden rending of that veil was a supernatural sign of the destruction of the temple being at hand, and of the dissolution of the Jewish oeconomy. The earth also trembled, and the rocks rent, in token of the Almighty's displeasure against the Jewish nation, on account of the horrid impiety whereof they were now guilty. Mr. Fleming tells us, that a deist, lately travelling through Palestine, was converted by viewing one of these rocks, which still remains torn asunder, not in the weakest place, but across the veins; a plain proof that it was done in a supernatural manner. Mr. Sandys, in his travels, p. 264 has given a natural description and delineation of this fissure; and Mr. Maundrell tells us, that it was about a span wide at the upper part, and two spans deep, after which it closes, but opens again below, and runs down to an unknown depth in the earth. He adds, that every man's sense and reason must convince him, that this is a natural and genuine breach. See Fleming's Christology, vol. 2: p. 97 and Maundrell's Journey from Aleppo, p. 73.

return to '

Matthew 27:54. Truly this was the Son of God— Or the Messiah. It is probable that this centurion was a proselyte to the Jewish religion, and acquainted with their opinions. Others however think, that it should be rendered, This was a Son of God; for as the centurion was a Roman, say they, among whom it was not uncommon to stile a person of remarkable abilities and merit a son of some deity, the centurion, in consequence of this custom, seeing the circumstances which attended this event, was convinced, that though Christ was executed as an impostor, yet he could not be less than the son of a god. The former however seems the most probable opinion, as it is most likely that these words of the centurion refer to those of the chief priests and scribes, Matthew 27:43. He said, I am the Son of God, See Ch. Matthew 26:63-64. Elsner, in a note on this place, has shewn, that some of the heathens had a notion among them, that prodigies, especially storms and earthquakes, sometimes attended the death of extraordinary persons peculiarly dear to the gods. Bishop Sherlock has made a fine useof the passage before us in the following words: "Go to your natural religion, (says he) lay before her Mahomet and his disciples arrayed in armour and in blood, riding in triumph over the spoils of thousands and tens of thousands who fell by his victorious sword. Shew her the cities which he set in flames, thecountries which he ravaged and destroyed, and the miserable distress of all the inhabitants of the earth. When she has viewed him in this scene, carry her to his retirements; shew her the prophet's chamber, his concubines and wives: let her see his adultery, and hear him allege revelation and a divine commission to justify his lust and his oppression. When she is tired with this prospect, then shew her the blessed Jesus, humble and meek, doing good to all the sons of men, patiently instructing both the ignorant and the perverse: let her see him in his most retired privacies; let her follow him to the mount, and hear his devotions and supplications to God: carry her to his table, to view his poor fare, and hear his heavenly discourse;let her see him injured, but not provoked; let her attend him to the tribunal, and consider the patience with which he endured the scoffs and reproaches of his enemies; lead her to his cross, and let her view him in the agony of death, and hear his last prayer for his persecutors, Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do."

"When natural religion has viewed both, ask which is the prophet of God?—but we have already had her answer; when she saw part of this scene through the eyes of the centurion who attended at the cross by him,—she spoke and said, truly this was the Son of God."

return to '

Matthew 27:56. And the mother of Zebedee's children— Though the construction of the original be dubious, yet I think it very rational, says Dr. Doddridge, to conclude, that the mother of the sons of Zebedee, or of James the greater and John, was a different person from the mother of James the less and Joses; both as the sons of Zebedee, though such distinguished friends of Christ, are never called his brethren, as James and Joses are, (See Ch. Mat 13:55 and Mark 6:3.) and as some Scriptures plainly intimate, that no more than two of the Apostles were the sons of Zebedee. See Ch. Mat 10:2 Mat 26:37 and Mark 3:17. The frequent mention which is made in the Evangelists of the generous and courageous zeal of some pious women in the service ofChrist,andespeciallyofthefaithfulandregular constancy with which they attended him in those last scenes of his sufferings, might very possibly be intended to obviate that haughty and senseless contempt which the pride of men, often irritated by those vexations to which their own irregular passions have exposed them, has in all ages affected to throw on that sex; which probably in the sight of God constitute the better half of mankind, and to whose care and tenderness the wisest and best of men generallyowe and ascribe much of the dailycomfort and enjoyment of their lives. See Mark 15:40.

return to '

Matthew 27:57. A rich man of Arimathea— A city of the Jews, anciently called Ramoth, which lay in the tribe of Ephraim, and was the city of the prophet Samuel. St. Mar 15:43 describes Joseph under these two characters; first, that he was an honourable counsellor; secondly, that he waited for the kingdom of God. And St. Luk 23:51 adds, that he had not consented to the condemnation of Jesus with the rest of the Sanhedrim. See Joh 19:38 and the note on Mat 27:1 of this chapter. Some critics would render the last clause, who himself also made disciples to Jesus; that is to say, after his ascension. The word εμαθητευσε has that sense in the 19th verse of the next.

return to '

Matthew 27:58. He went to Pilate and begged the body of Jesus— St. Mark says, Mar 15:43 that he went in boldly, and craved the body. And it was certainly a courageous act for that rich and noble senator thus publicly to own his friendship for Jesus in the midst of his greatest infamy; and a person of such sagacity could not but know, that if a resurrection should happen, nothing would have been more natural than that he should be brought into question as a confederate in the pretended fraud of conveying him away. But the regard he had for his Master overcame all other considerations; he therefore requested leave to take down his body, because, if no friend had obtained it, it would have been ignominiously cast out with those of the common malefactors. See a more distinct account of this event in John 19:38; John 19:42.

return to '

Matthew 27:60. In his own new tomb— See John 19:41. The sepulchre in which they laid our Lord, being but lately made, was unfinished, and had not yet a lock on its door; therefore they fastened the door by rolling a great stone to it. The word roll implies, that the stone was both ponderous and large, too large to be carried, and therefore it was rolled upon the ground; according to Beza's copy, it was so weighty, that twenty men could not roll it; which was the reason why the women asked that question recorded by another Evangelist,—Who shall roll away the stone for us? Which implied, that they were both too few and too weak to do it for themselves. This sepulchre it seems, differed from that of Lazarus, in being partly above ground; whereas the other, being wholly under ground, had a stone laid on the mouth of it, covering the entry of the stairs by which they went down to it. See Beza and Macknight.

return to '

Matthew 27:65. Pilate said unto them, ye have a watch— See Matthew 27:54. Pilate, thinking their request reasonable, allowed them to take as many soldiers as they pleased out of the cohort, which at the feast came from the castle Antonia, and kept guard in the porticoes of the temple; for, that they were not Jewish but Roman soldiers, whom the priests employed to watch the sepulchre, is evident from their asking them of the governor. Besides, when the soldiers returned with the news of Christ's resurrection, the priests desired them to report, that the disciples had stolen him away while they slept; and, to encourage them to tell the falsehood boldly, promised that if their neglect of duty came to the governor's ear, proper means should be used to pacify him, and to keep them safe; a promise which there was no need of making to their own servants. See Josephus's Antiq. L. 20: 100: 4.

return to '