Part 63 (1/2)

252 No imposter would have warned his followers, as Jesus did, of the persecutions they would have to submit to.

253 Danl. ix. 27.

254 Is. xiii. 9, 10. Joel iii. 15.

255 Gen. vii. 4, seq.

256 Interrogatively and sarcastically. That is, Was such thy wicked opinion? Then ”out of thine own mouth will I judge thee;” thou oughtest to have acted according to that opinion. Bp. SUMNER, _in loc_.

257 In St. John, Judas alone murmurs; in St. Matthew, the disciples have indignation; or, as St. Mark expresses it, some have indignation among themselves. Dr. Lardner says, Serm. v. 2, p. 316, ”It is well known to be very common with all writers, to use the plural number when one person only is intended. Nor is it impossible that others might have some uneasiness about it, though they were far from being so disgusted at it as Judas was. And their concern for the poor was sincere; his was self-interested, and mere pretence.” See also Grotius _in loc_. NEWCOME.

258 It is nowhere a.s.serted that the unction was of Jesus's head _only_, or of his feet _only_. Both actions are consistent; and St. John, in his supplemental history, may very well have added the respectful conduct of Mary, that, after having anointed Jesus's head, she proceeded to anoint his feet, and even to wipe them with her hair.

Newcome.

259 The other Evangelists mention that indignation was caused by the supposed waste of the ointment: John fixes it upon Judas. That Judas went to the High Priest's on the evening or night of our Wednesday, may be collected from Matth. xxvi. 14, 17, and the parallel places; and he seems to have acted partly from disgust at what had pa.s.sed.

The story has a remarkably apt connection with the preceding and subsequent history. The Jewish rulers consult how they may take Jesus by craft, and without raising a tumult among the people. An incident happens, which offends one of Jesus's familiar attendants, who immediately repairs to the enemies of Jesus, and receives from them a bribe to betray him in the absence of the mult.i.tude. Newcome.

260 Here is a very natural, yet incidental recognition of a rule, universally respected among the Jews, that this feast was to be celebrated not alone, but by companies of not less than ten persons.

See JOSEPHUS, Bell. Jud. vi. ix. -- 3. BLUNT, Veracity, &c. Sect. ii.

8.

261 Ps. xli. 10.

262 Zech. xiii. 7.

263 The other Evangelists simply say, Before the c.o.c.k crow.-It is observed, that the c.o.c.k crows about midnight: and about the fourth watch, or about three in the morning, when that watch began. When _gallicinium (c.o.c.k-crowing)_ stands alone, it means this latter time, which is referred to, Aristoph. Eccles. 390, Juv. Sat. ix.

107. The four Evangelists therefore denote the same time,-sc.

galliciniis secundis, as Ammia.n.u.s expresses it, 1. 22; and any part of the period thus marked out may be understood. See BOCHART de anim. pars, 2d. 119, and GROTIUS on Matth. xxvi. 34. NEWCOME.

264 In the animated language of the prophets, their predictions are often announced under the form of commands. The prophet Isaiah, in the sublime prediction he has given us of the fate of the king of Babylon, thus foretells the destruction of his family:-_Prepare slaughter for his children_, &c. Isa. xiv. 21. The prophet Jeremiah in like manner foretells the approaching destruction of the children of Zion: _Call for the mourning women, that they may come: and send for cunning women; and let them make haste, and take up a wailing_, &c. Jer. ix. 17, 18. There, matter of sorrow is predicted, by commanding the common attendants on mourning and lamentation to be gotten in readiness; here, warning is given of the most imminent dangers, by orders to make the customary preparation against violence, and to account a weapon more necessary than a garment.

CAMPBELL, _in loc_.

265 Isa. liii. 12.

266 This account of the inst.i.tution of the Lord's Supper is corroborated by that of Paul, in 1 Cor. xi. 23-25, which is usually inserted by Harmonists in this place as parallel testimony; but as the plan of this work leads me to deal with the four Gospels alone, the insertion of other parts of Scripture in the text, here and elsewhere, is omitted.

267 The Evangelists have determined, by some general expressions, the order of the following events between the sitting down to the paschal supper, and the going to Gethsemane. Before the eating of the paschal lamb, Jesus rises from supper to wash the disciples'

feet. John xiii. 1, 4. While they are eating, a declaration is made of Judas's treachery, and the bread is inst.i.tuted, Matt. xxvi. 21, 26. See also Mark. After, the cup is inst.i.tuted, Luke xxii. 20; 1 Cor. xi. 25. But as to the particular and precise order of the facts and discourses during this period, Pilkington's words relating to one of them are applicable to all. ”It is observable that St. Luke mentions the inst.i.tution of the communion before the declaration of Judas's treachery; whereas the other Evangelists place these in a different order. But it is a liberty I think very allowable in any historian, to neglect taking notice of the exact order of all the facts, when he is only giving a general account of what was done at a certain time. And if so, whichsoever was the true successive order, there can be no just imputation upon any of the Evangelists for neglecting to observe it in the narration.” Harm. p. 52.

NEWCOME.

268 The use of the word _testament_, (_diatheke_,) in a sense involving also the idea of a _covenant_, and in connexion with the circ.u.mstances of a compact, has greatly perplexed many English readers of the Bible. The difficulty occurs in Matt. 26, 28, and the parallel places, where our Lord employs the word _testament_, or last will, in connexion with the sacrificial shedding of his own blood; a ceremony which, by means of a suitable animal, usually was adopted among the ancients, upon the making of the most solemn engagements; and instead of which, the mutual partaking of the sacrament of the Lord's Supper, by the contracting parties, was subst.i.tuted among Christians in later times. The same embarra.s.sment occurs, perhaps in a greater degree, in the exposition of several pa.s.sages in the eighth and ninth chapters of the Epistle to the Hebrews, (manifestly written by a profound lawyer, be he Paul or Apollos), where he uses language applicable indifferently both to a covenant _inter vivos_ and a last will. For with us, a testament is simply a declaration of the last will of the testator, in regard to the disposition of his property after his decease, irrespective of any consent, or even knowledge, at the time, on the part of him to whom the estate is given; while a covenant requires the mutual consent of both parties, as essential to its existence. The one is simply the _ultima voluntas_ of an individual, the other is the _aggregatio mentium_ of both or all.

The solution of this difficulty belongs rather to theologians, whose province it is by no means intended here to invade; but perhaps a reference to the laws and usages in force in Judea in the times of our Saviour and his Apostles may furnish some aid, which a lawyer might contribute without transgressing the limit of his profession.

It is first to be observed that the munic.i.p.al laws of Greece and Rome were strikingly similar; those of Greece having been freely imported into the Roman jurisprudence. In like manner, the similarity of the Grecian laws and usages with those extant in Asia Minor, indicated a common origin; and thus, what Greece derived from Egypt and the states of Asia Minor, these states, after many ages, received again as the laws of their Roman masters. It should also be remembered that Palestine had been reduced to a Roman province some years before the time of our Saviour; long enough, indeed, to have become familiar with Roman laws and usages, even had they been previously unknown; and that Paul, to whom the Epistle to the Hebrews is generally attributed, was himself a thorough-bred lawyer, well versed in the customs of his country, whether ancient or modern. Among those nations, the civil magistrate often exercised the functions of the priesthood, these dignities being in some respects identical; and thus, whatever was transacted before the magistrate, might naturally seem to partake of the character of an act of religion. Covenants were always made with particular formalities, and to those of graver nature, religious solemnities were often superadded. They were frequently confirmed by an oath, the most solemn form of which was taken standing before the altar; and whosoever swore by the altar, swore by the sacrifice thereon, and was held as firmly bound as though he had pa.s.sed between the dismembered parts of the victim. Of the latter kind was the oath, by which G.o.d confirmed his covenant with Abraham (Gen. xv.) when the visible light of his presence pa.s.sed between the pieces which the patriarch had divided and laid ”each piece one against another.”

With these things in view, we may now look at some of the modes of transferring property, practised by the nations alluded to.

Among the methods of alienation or sale of property by the owner, in his lifetime, was that which in the Roman law was termed _manc.i.p.atio_; a mode by which the vendor conveyed property to the purchaser, each party being present, either in person or by his agent, representative, or factor. Five witnesses were requisite, one of whom was called _libripens_, or the balance-holder. This form had its origin in the sale of goods by weight, but was gradually extended to all sales; and the practice was for the buyer to strike the balance with a piece of money called a _sestertius_, which was immediately paid over to the vendor as part of the price; and hence the expression _per aes et libram vendere_.