cy of Ezekiel, (39: 17—19,) and in the Apocalypse, (19: 17, 18), so far is this allegoric spirit carried, that we find orders given to brute animals to do what the prophet means only to foretell us they will do. Indeed, this is so much in the vivid manner of scriptural prophecy, that I am astonished that a man of bishop Pearce's abilities should have been so puzzled to reconcile this clause to our Saviour's intention of yielding without resistance, that, rather than admit it, he would recur to an expedient whose tendency is but too evidently to render Scripture precarious and uncertain. 38. "Here are two swords-It is enough." The remark here made by the disciples, and our Lord's answer, show manifestly two things: the first is, that his meaning was not perfectly comprehended by them; the second, that he did not think it necessary at that time, to open the matter further to them. Their remark evinces that they understood him literally; and it is, by consequence, a confirmation (if a confirmation were needed) of the common reading of ver. 36. By his answer, Izavóv čore, “It is enough," though he declined attempting to undeceive them by entering further into the subject, he signified, with sufficient plainness to those who should reflect on what he said, that arms were not the resource they ought to think of. For what were two swords against all the ruling powers of the nation? The import of the proverbial expression here used by our Lord is therefore this, ' We need no more :' which does not imply that they really needed, or would use, those they had. 51. "Let this suffice," are las zovrov. E. T. "Suffer ye thus far." This version is obscure, and susceptible of very different interpretations. All antiquity seems agreed in understanding our Lord's expression as a check to his disciples, by intimating that they were not to proceed further in the way of resistance; as it was not to such methods of defence that he chose to recur. What is recorded by the other evangelists (Mt. 26: 52, 53. J. 18: 11), as likewise said on the occasion, strongly confirms this explanation. Another indeed has been suggested; namely, that the words were spoken to the soldiers, who are supposed, before now, to have seized his person; and that our Lord asked of them, that they would grant him liberty to go to the man whose ear had been cut off, that he might cure him: the only instance wherein Jesus needed the permission, or the aid, of any man in working a miracle. An explanation this every way exceptionable; but it is sufficient here to take notice, that it is totally destitute of evidence. Elsner, who favors this interpretation, after giving what he takes to be the sense in a paraphrastical explanation, quotes by way of evidence, two passages from the same author, in order to prove what was never questioned by any body-that us, followed by the genitive, sometimes answers to the La. ad. The only thing, in the present case, which requires proof is, that such an ellipsis, made by the suppres sion of two principal words, μe ¿¿ev, is consistent with use in the language; and the only proof is precedents. Would sinite ad istum in La. or, which is equivalent, suffer to him in Eng. convey that sense? Yet nobody will deny, that sinite me ire ad istum in the one language, and suffer me to go to him in the other, clearly express it. Just so, it is admitted, that are εīv čμ¿ ¿ws roúrov would convey that sense, though are tws touto does not. The extent of use in Gr. is learnt only from examples, as well as in La. and Eng. Now, in the quotations brought by Elsner, there is no ellipsis at all; consequently they are not to the purpose. On the other hand, every body knows that is, which is an adverb of time, when joined to tourov, means commonly hucusque, 'hitherto ;' and that adverbs of time are occasionally used as nouns, may be easily exemplified in most languages. "Behold, now," says Paul, 2 Cor. 6: 2, "is the accepted time," 'Idov vvv zaigos evпgóodεx10s. The words of our Lord, in the most simple and natural interpretation, denote, "Let pass what is done-Enough of this-no more of this." 52. "Officers of the temple-guard,” orqarnyovs rov iεqov E. T." Captains of the temple." The temple had always a guard of Levites, who kept watch in it by turns, day and night. There are references to this practice in the O. T., both in the Prophets and in the Psalms. Över this guard one of the priests was appointed captain; and this office, according to Josephus, was next in dignity to that of high-priest. It appears from Acts 4: 1. 5: 24, 26, as well as from the Jewish historian, that there was one who had the chief command. The plural number is here used for comprehending those who were assigned to the captain as counsellors and assistants. The addition of the word guard seemed to be necessary in Eng. for the sake of perspicuity. 2 "Clubs," Euhov. E. T. Staves." A staff is intended principally for assisting us in walking; a club is a weapon both offensive and defensive. The former is, in Gr. daßdos; the latter, žulov. To show that these words are in the Gospel never used promiscuously, let it be observed, that in our Lord's commands to his apostles, in relation to the discharge of their office, when what concerned their own accommodation in travelling is spoken of, the word gados is used by all the three evangelists, Mt. Mr. and L., who take particular notice of that transaction. But, in the account given by the same evangelists of the armed multitude sent by the high-priests and elders to apprehend our Lord, they never employ the term ῥάβδος, but always ξύλον. 54. "Then they seized him, and led him away to the highpriest's house,” συλλαβόντες δὲ αὐτὸν ἤγαγον, καὶ εἰσήγαγον αὐτὸν ris tov olxov tov άozioέws. E. T. "Theh took they him, and led him, and brought him into the high-priest's house." Vul. "Comprehendentes autem eum, duxerunt ad domum principis sacerdotum." The words xai sionyayov avtov are not in the Cam. and two other MSS, and some evangelistaries. The Sy. and Sax. interpreters, and therefore probably the author of the old Itc. version, have not read them. It is plain they add nothing to the sense. *Ηγαγον εἰς τόν οἶκον, and εἰσήγαγον εἰς τὸν οἶκον, are the same thing. One of these superadded to the other, is a mere tautology. Besides, there appears something of quaintness in the expression, αὐτὸν ἤγαγον καὶ εἰσήγαγον αὐτὸν, which is very unlike this writer's style. I have therefore preferred here the more simple manner of the Vul. and the Sy. 55. "When they had kindled a fire in the middle of the court," ἁψάντων δὲ πῦρ ἐν μέσῳ τῆς αὐλῆς. Ε. Τ. “ When they had kindled a fire in the midst of the hall." The expression v μow is an evidence that this avan was an open court. Besides, avin here appears contradistinguished to oixos in the preceding verse. Mt. 28: 58. N. 66. "The national senate," to лoεoßvréρiov roũ laoù. E. T. "The elders of the people." I do not introduce this title here as though there were any difficulty in explaining it, or any difference, in respect of sense, in the different translations given of it; but solely to remark, that this evangelist is the only sacred writer who gives this denomination to the sanhedrim; for there can be no doubt that it is of it he is speaking. This is the only passage in the Gospel where it occurs. The same writer (Acts 22: 5), also applies the title πρεσβυτέριον, without the addition τοῦ λαοῦ, to this court, or at least to the members whereof it was composed, considered as a body. I thought it allowable, where it can be done with propriety, (for it cannot in every case), to imitate even these little differences in the style of the inspired penmen. Diss. XII. Part i. sect. 9, 10. CHAPTER XXIII. 11. "A shining robe," loonta λaμnçàv. E. T. "A gorgeous robe." Vul. "Veste alba." Er. Zu. Cas. Be. "Veste splendida." Though the Gr. word may be rendered either way, I prefer the latter, as denoting the quality of the garment which was the most remarkable; for this epithet was most properly given to those vestments wherein both qualities, white and shining, were united. That the word laμngós was used for white, the application of it by Polybius to the toga worn by the candidates for offices at Rome, if there were no other evidence, would be sufficient. But when nothing beside the color was intended, the word leuxos was used corresponding to the La. albus, as λaunoós did to candidus. Such white and splendid robes were worn in the east by sovereigns. Herod caused our Lord to be dressed in such a garment, not, as 1 imagine, to signify the opinion he had of his innocence, but in derision of his pretensions to royalty. Perhaps it was intended to insinuate, that those pretensions were so absurd as to merit no other punishment than contempt and ridicule. Dio. has 15. "He hath done nothing to deserve death," ovdiv äğıov daváτου ἐστὶ πεπραγμένον αὐτῷ. Ε. Τ. " Nothing worthy of death is done unto him." This, though unintelligible, is a literal version from the Vul. Er. and Zu. "Nihil dignum morte actum est ei :" the meaning of which, as it is here connected, if it have a meaning, is, 'Herod hath not deserved to die for any thing he hath done to Jesus.' Now, as it is certain that this cannot be Pilate's meaning, being quite foreign from his purpose, I see no other resource but in supposing that πεπραγμένον αὐτῷ is equivalent to πεπραγμένον ὑπ' autou. I am not fond of recurring to unusual constructions, but here I think there is a necessity; inasmuch as this sentence of Pilate, interpreted by ordinary rules, and considered in reference to his subject, is downright nonsense. As to other versions, the Sy. has rendered the words not more intelligibly than the Vul. Cas. adopting the construction here defended, says, "nihil morte dignum ab hoc factum esse." Be. to the same purpose, "nihil dignum morte factum est ab eo." Lu. keeps close to the Vul. The G. F. has followed the Vul. in what regards the construction, but has introduced a supply from conjecture, to make out a meaning," rien ne lui a été fait [qu'importe qu'il soit] digne de mort." taken the same method,'-"nienti gli e stato fatto [di cio che si farebbe a uno] che havesse meritata la morte." It is strange that Be. has not here been followed by any of those Protestant translators who have sometimes, without necessity, (where there was no difficulty in the words) followed him in the liberties he had taken, much more exceptionable in respect of the sense than the present, and less defensible in respect of the expression. Some more recent translators, both Fr. and Eng., L. Cl. Dodd. and others, admit the manner of construing the sentence adopted here. I shall subjoin a few things which had influence with me in forming a judgment of this matter. A similar example is not, I believe, to be found in the N. T. nor in the Sep.; but so many examples of ллραγμένον τινι, for πεπραγμένον ὑπὸ τινος, have been produced from classical authors by Raphelius and Wet. as show it to have been no uncommon idiom. Now, though L. abounds in Hebraisms as much as any sacred writer, yet he has oftener than the rest recourse to words and idioms, which he could acquire only from conversing with the Gentiles, or reading their authors; and has, upon the whole, as was observed before, (Preface, sect. 11), greater variety in his style than any other of the evangelists. Further, it strength ens the argument, that πράσσειν ἄξιον θανάτου is a phrase not unfrequent with L. (see Acts 25: 11:25. 26: 31), for expressing to do what deserveth death; and, as the only inquiry on this occasion was, what Jesus had done, and what he deserved to suffer, there is the strongest internal probability, from the scope of the place, that it must mean what had been done by him, and not to him. Lastly, no other version that is both intelligible and suited to the context can be given, without a much greater departure from the ordinary rules of interpretation and of syntax than that here made. To be convinced of this, one needs only consider a little the Itn. and G. F. translations of this passage above recited. 23. "Their clamors, and those of the chief priests, prevailed," κατίσχυον αἱ φωναὶ αὐτῶν καὶ τῶν ἀρχιερεών. Vul. Invalescebant voces eorum. With this agree one MS. which omits xai tav dorotov, and the Sax. and Cop. versions. 35. "The elect of God," o roû Øɛov indexrós. This title is adopted from Isaiah 42: 1, and appears to be one of those by which the Messiah was at that time distinguished. Diss. V. Part iv. sect. 14. 43." Paradise." Diss. VI. Part ii. sect. 19, 20, 21. 50. A senator named Joseph.” Ανὴρ ὀνόματι Ιωσήφ βουλευ ins úпάoxшv. E. T. "A man named Joseph, a counsellor." The word Bovievin's occurs nowhere in the N. T. but here and in the parallel passage in Mr. Some think that it denotes a member of the sanhedrim, the national senate and supreme judicatory. Father Simon says that all the Jewish doctors thus applied the term Povlevral. See his note on Mr. 15: 43. Gro. though doubtful, inclinés rather to make Joseph a city magistrate; and Lightfoot, founding also on conjecture, is positive that he was one of the council-chamber of the temple. To me, the first appears far the most probable opinion. What the evangelist advances, ver. 51, is a strong presumption of this, and more than a counterbalance to all that has been urged by Gro. and Lightfoot in support of their respective hypotheses. "He had not concurred," says the historian, "in their resolutions and proceedings." To the pronoun avτæv, their, the antecedent, though not expressed, is clearly indicated by the construction to be oi Povlevral, the senators.' And of these the crucifixion of Jesus is here represented as the resolution and the deed. With what propriety could it be called the deed of the city magistrates of Jerusalem, or (if possible, still worse) of a council which was no judicatory, being intended solely for regulating the sacred service, and inspecting the affairs of the temple? The title vonuav given him by Mr. shows him to have been of the highest dignity. But, admit that this does not amount to a proof that Joseph was a member of the sanhedrim, there is no impropriety in rendering ovλevens 'senator.' The Eng. word admits the VOL. II. 52 |