Part 59 (2/2)

121 1 Kings xvii. 1, 9.

122 2 Kings v. 14.

123 The accuracy of this description is attested by travellers, to this day. See ROBINSON'S Travels in Palestine, vol. iii., pp. 186, 187.

124 Matthew says that the disciples were called by Christ while walking by the sea, because that calling followed the walk by the sea. ”We say that a thing was done by one walking in this or that place, because he took such a walk, whether he who did the act was then walking, or sitting or standing.” Spanb. dub. lxxii. v. 2. This remark reconciles ”_walking_,” Matth. iv. 18 with ”_stood_,” Luke v.

1. A like remark may be made with respect to the pa.s.sages placed parallel to Luke v. 6. Jesus is concisely represented as if he had at first seen Peter and Andrew casting a net into the sea, because they were employed thus in consequence of the interview.

Luke does not deny that more than Simon were seen, nor does he affirm that Simon was seen. Indeed our Lord is said to have seen two s.h.i.+ps by the lake. The calling of others beside Simon not only is not denied by Luke, but is sufficiently indicated in v. 11. The words of Matthew (v. 21) ”going on from thence,” are not to be understood as implying a great distance, but as relating to the neighbouring sh.o.r.e. Matthew relates the princ.i.p.al fact, the calling and the following; Luke has the accompanying circ.u.mstances. And there is a remarkable harmony between them. Matthew records the repairing of their nets by the fishermen; Luke shows how they became broken,-by the great draught they had taken. What is related by Luke, is not denied by Matthew, but omitted only. Nothing, indeed, is more common than to find the omission of some supplied by the other Evangelists. NEWCOME.

125 The death of Zebedee is nowhere mentioned in the gospels; yet an undesigned coincidence, and proof of the veracity of the Evangelists, is evident by comparing this place with others, in which his death is tacitly alluded to. Thus, in Chap. viii. 21, it is related that ”another of his _disciples_ said unto him, Lord, suffer me first to go and _bury my father_;” and in Chap. xx. 20, it is said, ”Then came to him the _mother of Zebedee's children_ with her sons, wors.h.i.+pping him,” &c. See also Chap. xxvii. 55. BLUNT, Veracity of the Gospels, Sec. I. 2. See note on Mark vi. 3; Post, -- 55.

126 There is no inconsistency between this place and the last clause of Luke iv. 35. The word translated _torn_, signifies to move, agitate, convulse. It occurs only twice in the Septuagint. In 2. Sam. xxii.

8, the Hebrew signifies to be shaken, _ut in terrae motu_. In Jer.

iv. 19, it is applied to commotion of mind. Here, the demoniac was violently agitated; but the agitation left no lasting bad effect; he was restored to perfect health and soundness. NEWCOME.

127 Is. liii. 4.

128 This clause may be rendered ”when the day was coming on,” and thus be reconciled with the words of Mark, who says it was a great while before day, namely, before broad day-light. SCOTT, _in loc_

129 ”The miraculous cure of the leprosy was thought by the Jews to be characteristic of the Messiah; and therefore there was peculiar reason for enjoining this man silence.” _Benson's Life of Christ_, p. 340. NEWCOME. For the consequences of a premature full manifestation of himself as the Messiah, by awakening the jealousy of the Roman government, might, humanly speaking, have impeded his ministry. Yet there was great propriety in the private exhibition, to the priesthood, of full proof that he was the Messiah; after which, their obstinacy in rejecting him was inexcusable. In this, and divers other instances, our Lord manifested his intent not to be generally known to the Jews as their Messiah, till the consummation of his ministry. A general announcement of his divine character at the outset would have been productive of no good; on the contrary it would have excited the malice of the Scribes, Pharisees and Herodians against him; would have favoured the conceit of the Jews that he was to be their temporal king; would have awakened the jealousy of the Roman government; and in the natural course of things, would have prevented him from giving the many miraculous proofs which he gave of his ministry, and thus laying solid foundations for faith in his divine mission; would have exposed him and his religion to the charge of ostentation, vanity, and love of power and display; and would have deprived the world of that example which he gave, of meekness, humility and patient suffering and self-denial. According to human experience, an early a.s.sumption of regal splendour, supported by the miracles he wrought, would have been successful, and carried him to the throne instead of the cross; but it would have deprived the world of the great object of his mission. A sufficient number were enlightened to attest his miracles and proclaim his religion, and enough were left in their ignorance, to condemn and crucify him. See A. CLARKE, and SCOTT, _in loc_.

130 Lev. xiv. 2, seq.

131 When a Jew became a Roman citizen, he usually a.s.sumed a Roman name.

It is therefore supposed that Levi was the original Hebrew, and Matthew the a.s.sumed Roman name of this evangelist. STOWE'S Introd.

120. See also, HARMER'S Obs. vol. iv. p. 330; Obs. 94.

132 It is observable that though John speaks of this pool or bath as existing at the time he wrote, which was upwards of sixty years after the crucifixion, yet he speaks of the efficacy of its waters in the past tense, as something which had long ceased. This may account for the silence of Josephus concerning it; whether we suppose it to have been really a miraculous virtue, existing only in the time of our Saviour; or merely a groundless belief of the populace.

133 Spanheim, dub. evang. ii. 185, doubts how the latter part of this verse is reconcilable with Matthew iii. 17, and the parallel verses.

But the voice from heaven was not G.o.d's _immediate_ voice; but uttered at his command, and in his person. See Deut. iv. 33; Ex. xx.

1, 2; Comp. Hebr. ii. 2; Gal. iii. 19; Acts vii. 53. NEWCOME.

134 Deut. xxiii. 25.

135 The act of plucking the ears of corn by the hand, in another's field, was expressly permitted, by the law of Moses, Deut. xxiii.

23; but it was considered so far a species of reaping as to be servile work, and therefore not lawful to be done on the Sabbath.

CAMPBELL, _in loc_. See ROBINSON'S Biblical Researches in Palestine, Vol. 2, pp. 192, 201, that this custom is still in use.

136 Hos. vi. 6.

137 It appears from 1 Sam. xxi. 1, that Abimelech was the high priest at the time referred to; but Abiathar his son was the _chief_ priest under him, and probably superintended the tabernacle and its stated concerns. Abimelech was soon after slain; and Abiathar succeeded him in that office, and continued in it about forty years, until after the death of David. This circ.u.mstance, and his great eminence, above his father, may account for the use of his name rather than his father's, as ill.u.s.trating the times of David and Saul. See SCOTT, _in loc_.

138 Numb. xxviii. 9, 10; xviii. 19.

<script>