Page images

the intention of Providence, than the intention of the person spoken of. This circumstance is mentioned by our Lord here, with a view to suggest the nearness of his funeral. For the import of the word évtaqıáoai, see the note on J. 19: 40.

“ Thirty shekels,” teidzovia ágyugia. Diss. VIII. Part i. sect. 10.

16. “ To deliver him up," iva avrov napadã. E. T. “ To betray bim.” We say a man has sold what he has concluded a bargain about, though he has not delivered it to the purchaser. In like manner, Judas betrayed his master to the pontiffs when the terms were settled between them, though he did not then put them in possession of his person.

22. “Began every one of them to say,” nogavto héyelv auto EXQOros avrov. Mr. 5: 17. N.

26. “ The loaf,” zov äorov. E. T. “ Bread.” Had it been aprov, without the article, it might bave been rendered either

bread,' or 'a loaf;' but as it has the article, we must, if we would fully express the sense, say 'the loaf. Probably, on such occasions, one loaf, larger or smaller, according to the company, was part of the accustomed preparation. This practice, at least in the apostolic age, seems to have been adopted in the church in commemorating Christ's death. To this, it is very probable, the apostle alludes, 1 Cor. 10: 18. "Otiis žotos, é v owua oi nodoi touevo oi quo návTES 1ToŰ Évos aotou METĖXOUEv. That is, ‘Because there is one loaf, we, though many, are one body; for we all partake of the one loaf.' It is in the common translation, “ For we, being many, are one bread and one body; for we are all partakers of that one bread.” Passing at present some other exceptions which might be made to this version, there is no propriety in saying one bread, more than in saying one water, or one wine. Ch. 4: 3. N. .

2 “Having given thanks,” súhoynoas. But the number of MSS. many of them of principal note, editions, fathers, etc. that read ev yapornoas, is so great, as to remove every doubt of its being genuine. Mill and Wet. both receive it. Indeed it may be said to be of little consequence here which way we read, as the two words are admitted by critics to be, in this application, synonymous. Ch. 14: 19. N.

28. “Or the new covenant,” tñs xaluñs diaonans. Diss. V.

Partan: Of the t

Part il...of the product this fruit of the I have liter

he word verwine, but the phrase

29. “Of the product of the vine," <x zoútov toŨ yevvuaros ins d'unedov. E. T. “Of this fruit of the vine." But the Gr. term for fruit is καρπος. The word γεννήμα I have literally rendered. Besides, the fruit of the vine is not wine, but grapes; and we speak of eating, but never of drinking, fruit. In the phrase corresponding to this in the Heb. rituals, a term is employed that commonly signifies fruit. But our original is the language of the evange

lists, not that of the rabbis. The product is here equivalent to this product; because it cannot be this individual, but this in kind, that is meant.

2 “ Until the day when I shall drink it with you in my Father's kingdom.” I confess I do not see the difficulty which some fancy they see in these words. That the expression is figurative, will not, I believe, be denied; yet not more so than the terms fire and brimstone, as applied to the future doom of the wicked. If we have not positive evidence that there will be any thing in heaven analogous to eating and drinking, as little have we, that there will not. And there is at least no absurdity in the supposition. As far as our acquaintance with living creatures extends, means are always necessary for the support of life. That no means are requisite in heaven, (if it be a truth), is not self-evident. It will hardly be pretended that it is expressly revealed ; and as yet we have no experience on the subject. We know there will be nothing analogous to marriage. Where the inhabitants are immortal, there is no need of fresh supplies. But it does not appear implausible, that the use of means for the preservation of life may constitute one distinction between the iminortal existence of angels and men, and that of him who, by way of eminence, is said (1 Tim. 6: 16), “ alone to have immortality.” Difficulties in Scripture arise osten from a contradiction neither to reason nor to experience; but to the presumption we have rashly taken up, in matters whereof we have no knowledge.

30.“ After the hymn,” vuvnoavtes. E. T. “When they had sung an hymn.” But úuvé'w may be either • I sing,' or ' I recite a hynn. In the latter way it has been understood by the author of the Vul. and by Ar. who render it “ Et hymno dicio." Cas. to the same purpose, “ Deinde dictis laudibus.” But Er. Zu. Be. Pisc. and Cal. « Quum hymnum cecinissent." All the modern translations I have seen, except Lu's, and such as are made from the Vul. follow these last: the Sy, is equally ambiguous with the original, and so are most of the oriental versions, and the M.G. As it is evident, however, that the words are susceptible of either interpretation, I have followed neither, but used an expression of equal latitude with the original. I have chosen to say the hymn, rather than a hymn; as it is a known fact, that particular Psalms, namely the cxiv. and four following, were regularly used after the paschal supper.

31. “ I shall prove a stumbling-stone to you all,” névtes vuzīs oxavdahco inosohe èv čuoi. E. T.“ All ye shall be offended because of me.” The word snare answers equally well with stumbling-stone for conveying the sentiment, (ch. 5: 29. N.) ; yet as there may be here an allusion to the passage in the Psalms (so often quoted in the N. T.) representing our Lord as a select and chief corner-stone, which to many would prove a stone of stumbling,

nérpa oravoálov, I have been induced to prefer a closer interpretation in this place.

38. “My soul is overwhelmed with a deadly anguish," nepikunós doliv rj wuyn uov Ews Javárov. E. T. “My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death.” But this expression, unto death, is rather indefinite, and seems to imply a sorrow that would continue till death ; whereas the import of the original is, such a sorrow as is sufficient 10 cause death, that is, deadly. Cas. has expressed the sense thus, “ In tanto sum animi dolere ait emoriar.” The last clause sufficiently explains ius Javárov.

39. “Not as I would, but as thou wilt,” our ws yo téhw, ora' ois ou. E. T. “ Not as I will, but as thou wilt." As the Heb. has no subjunctive or potential mood, the indicative, in conformity to the oriental idiom, is frequently used by the peninen of the N. T. in the sense of the subjunctive. Our Lord's will, in effect, perfectly coincided with his Father's; because it was his supreme desire that his Father should be obeyed, rather than that any inclination of his own should be gratified. The first clause, therefore, ought 10 express, not what was in reality, as matters stood, but what would have been his desire, on the supposition that his Father's will did not interfere. This is properly expressed by L. CI.“ Non coinme je le voudrois, mais comme tu le veux,” which is the way I have adopted.

45.“ Sleep on now, and take your rest,” xatsudete to 2017ov, xui avanaveo) E. Some late interpreters translate this with an interrogation, thus, “Do ye still sleep on, and take your rest ?” This appears, at first, to suit better the words which follow, “ Arise, let us be going.” I cannot, however, help favoring the more cominon, which is also the more ancient translation. The phrase to doinov, and simply dowóv, when it relates to time, seems always to denote the future. There are only three other places in Scripture where it has clearly a relation 10 time; and in regard to these there can be no doubt. The first is Acts 27: 20, Moinov neoimoeiro nãoa ihnis TOÙ OMGEoj al viuās. E. T.“ All hope that we should be saved was then taken away.” The version would have been still beiter is closer, and instead of then, it had been thenceforth. It is rendered by Cas. “Cætero spes oninis salutis nostræ sublata erat.” 2 Tim. 4: 8, where it is rendered by our translators “ henceforth ;' and Heb. 10: 13, where it is rendered “froin henceforth.” There is reason, therefore, here to retain the common version ; nor is there any inconsistency between this order, which contains an ironical reproof, very natural in those circumstances, and the exhortation which follows, “ Arise.” Ch. 23: 32. N.

?" Of sinners," duaprwhôv. The Gr. svord expresses more here than is implied in the Eng. term. Our Lord thereby signified that he was to be consigned to the heathen, whom the Jews called,



by way of eminence, auaprwioi, because idolaters. See Gal. 2: 15. For a similar reason they were also called ävouoi, ' lawless,'

impious,' as destitute of the law of God. The expression dià YELpôv úvóu ww (Acts 2: 23) ought therefore to be rendered, not as in the E. T.“ by wicked hands," but by the hands of the wicked, or rather impious.

47. “Clubs,” tulov. L. 22: 52. 2 N.
50. “Friend,” ¿raiga. Diss. XII. Part i. sect 11.

52. “ Whoever hath recourse to the sword”-a proverbial expression not to be rigidly interpreted. Such sayings are understood to suggest what frequently, not what always happens. It seems to have been introduced at this time, in order to signify to the disciples that such weapons as swords were not those by which the Messiah's cause was to be defended.

55. “A robber," amornv. E. T.“ A thief.” Diss. XI. Part ii. sect. 6.

58. “ The court of the high-priest's house," ins aviñs Zeepiw. E.T.“ The high-priest's palace." From ver. 69, as well as from what we are told in the other Gospels, it is evident that Peter was only in the court without, which, though enclosed on all sides, was open above, nor was it anywise extraordinary to kindle a fire in such a place. L. 22: 55. N.

?« Officers,” ünnostāv. E. T.“ Servants.” 'Tanpétal means, commonly, servants of the public, or official servants of those in authority, the officers of a judicatory.

59. “ And the elders,” xai oi npEOBút2001. This clause is wanting in the Vul. Cop. and Arm. versions, and in two or three MSS. It is not wanting in the Sax. which makes it probable that the Itc. read as we do.

6. “ But though many false witnesses appeared, they found it not,” και ουχ εύρον, και πολλών ψευδομάρτυρων προσελθόντων, ουχ tupov. The repetition of ovm' cúpov, in the common copies, is very unlike the manner of this writer. In the Vul. Sy. Cop. Ara, and Sax. the phrase is found only once. It is not repeated in the Com. nor in some ancient MSS. As it makes no addition to the sense, and does not perfectly agree with the strain of the narrative, I have followed the example of some of the best ancient translators, in avoiding the repetition.

63. “ I adjure thee,” ?ooxicw ge. This appears to have been the Jewish manner of administering an oath. The Heb. y.2017 hishbiang, which in the 0. T. is commonly, by our interpreters, rendered to make one swear,' is justly translated by the Seventy okoićw, or itooxiśw. The name of the Deity sworn by was subjoined, sometimes with, sometimes without a preposition. Thus Gen. 24: 3, where we have an account of the oath administered by Abraham to his steward, which is rendered in the Eng. Bible, “I will make thee swear by the Lord, the God of heaven, and the God of the earth," is thus expressed in the Sep. dooxiw og Kýpuov tov DEÓv toð o úpavoû xai insyns, “ I adjure thee by Jehovah, the God of heaven and earth.” After such adjuration, by a magistrate or lawful superior, the answer returned by the person adjured was an answer upon oath: a false answer was perjury ; and even the silence of the person adjured was not deemed innocent. Many examples of this use of the simple verb doxico, which is of the same import with the compound, may be discovered by consulting Trommius' Concordance. Mr. 5: 7. N.

64. “ At the right hand of the Almighty," ix de Eccūv oñs duvaNEWS. E. T.“ On the right hand of power.” The Heb. word 7792901, hageburah, power, or might, in the abstract, that is omnipotence, or supreme power, was become, with Jewish writers, a common appellation for God. As the abstract here does not suit the idiom of our tongue, and as, in meaning, it is equivalent to our word 'the Almighty,” I have used this term in the translation. The Vul. says, " Virtutis Dei.”

65.“ Blasphemy.” Diss. X. Part ii.

68. “ Divine to us,” rooqntevcov rjuiv. E. T.“ Prophesy unto us.” But the Eng. verb to prophesy, always denotes to foretell what is future : here a declaration is required concerning what was past. The verb to divine is applicable to either, as it denotes simply to declare any truth not discoverable by the natural powers of man. From the Evangelists Mr. and L. we learn that our Lord was at this time blindfolded.

71. “Said to them, This man too was there,” heyet tois éxET Kai oúros iv., E. T. “ Said unto them that were there, This fellow was also." But a very great number of MSS. amongst which are some of the most ancient, read légal aurois. 'Exsi xai oúros nv. The Sy. and Go. have read so. It is in the Com. and Ald. editions. It is supported by Origen and Chr. and preferred by Gro. Mill, and Wetstein. I night add, that in the common reading the adv. exei is absurdly superfluous; for who can imagine that she addressed herself to those who were not there?

adv. čněl is absurdl; I might add, that in in and preferred


2. “The procurator.” Diss. VIII. Part ïï. sect. 17.

5. “Strangled bitnself,” anńyšato. E. T.“ Hanged himself.” The Gr. word plainly denotes strangling ; but does not say how, by hanging, or otherwise. It is quite a different term that is used in those places where hanging is mentioned. It may be rendered, "was strangled,' or' was suffocated.' I have, in the above version, followed the Sy. The common translation follows the Vul, which

« PreviousContinue »