surrection. Besides, their thoughts were so swallowed up in the depth of their grief, that as they took little notice of any thing without them, so they did not narrowly examine the features of their fellow-traveller. Jesus therefore spake to them in the character of a stranger, making free, as travellers might do with one another, to ask what the subject of their conversation was, and why they looked so sad? Luke xxiv. 17. And he said unto them, What manner of communications are these that ye have one to another, as ye walk and are sad? 18, And one of them, whose name was Cleophas, answering, said unto him, Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things which are come to pass there in these days? Cleophas was surprised that any one who had come from Jerusalem should have been ignorant of the extraordinary things which had lately happened there. 19. And he said unto them, What things? And they said unto him, Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, which was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God, and all the people: 20. And how the chief priests and our rulers delivered him to be condemned to death, and have crucified him. Having thus given an account of Christ's character, miracles, and sufferings, Cleophas was so ingenuous as to acknowledge, that they once believed him to be the deliverer of Israel, and in that faith had been his disciples; but that they began now to think themselves mistaken, because he had been dead three days. 21. But we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel; and beside all this, to-day is the third day since these things were done. Cleophas added, that some women of their acquaintance, who had been that morning at the sepulchre, astonished them with the news of his resurrection, affirming that they had seen a vision of angels, which told them he was alive. It seems his companion and he had left the city before any of the women came with the news of Christ's personal appearance. 22. Yea, and certain women also of our company made us astonished, which were early at the sepulchre: 23. And when they found not his body, they came, say ing, that they had also seen a vision of angels, which said that he was alive."

The smallest attention will shew, that Cleophas and his companion do not here speak of Mary Magdalene's second information, given after she had seen the angels, because Jesus himself having appeared to her before she stirred from the spot, it is by no means probable that she would tell the lesser, and omit the greater event. Neither do they speak of the information which the company of women, Mary Magdalene's companions, gave the apostles, after they had seen Jesus, because they in like manner must have related that much rather than any thing else. But the report of which they speak was either made by a company of women different from that in which Mary the mother of James

and

and Salome were, who saw Jesus as they went to tell his disciples concerning the vision of angels; or it was made by that company before they saw the Lord. That it was not made by any company different from that in which Mary and Salome were, is certain, because Luke says expressly, that Mary, Salome, Mary Magdalene, Joanna, and the rest, concurred in giving it, chap. xxiv. 10. Wherefore it must have been the report which Mary Magdalene made alone, after having been with the women at the sepulchre the first time, and which they confirmed before they saw the Lord, as has been shewed § 152. According to this account of the matter indeed, the report which Mary Magdalene made alone, is not distinguished from that of her companions, Mary, Salome, and Joanna. Yet there seems to be a hint given of it in the first clause of the verse under consideration. For the words, And when they found not his body, may refer to Mary Magdalene's first information; as the subsequent words, They came, saying, that they had also seen a vision of angels, describe the information given by her companions. In the mean time, though it should be allowed that Mary Magdalene's report is not distinguished from that of her companions, either by Luke. in his history of the resurrection, or by the disciples going to Emmaus, it will not follow that her report was made at the same time with theirs, or that the evangelist meant to say so. For though they were distinct in point of time, they might fitly be joined together, for four reasons: 1. Because the persons who made them had gone out in one company to the sepulchre. 2. Because they were made soon after each other. 3. Because the subject of both was the same. Mary Magdalene first brought word that the stone was rolled back, that the door was open, and the body gone. The other women came immediately after her, and told the same things; adding, that they had seen a vision of angels, which affirmed that Jesus was alive. 4. In telling their story to this supposed stranger, the two disciples would think it needless to make the distinction more particularly. But if the disciples, in their account of these reports, joined them together for the reasons mentioned, the evangelist Luke might, for the same reasons, speak of them as one in his history of Christ's resurrection, agreeably to the brevity which he has studied throughout the whole of his work. See on Luke xxiv. 9. § 150.

Luke xxiv. 24. "And certain of them which were with us went to the sepulchre, and found it even so as the women had said; but him they saw not. When the women who had been at the sepulchre told us, that they had seen angels who assured them that Jesus was risen, some of our number went thither in great haste, hoping to see these angels, as the women told them that they were in the sepulchre when they came away. On their ar rival they found it even as the women had said; for they were

favoured

favoured with a sight of the angels, but had not the pleasure of seeing Jesus."

This is generally understood of the journey which Peter and John made to the sepulchre, immediately after Mary Magdalene's first report, but with what truth may be questioned. The reason is, at that journey Peter and John had heard nothing of the vi-, sion of angels, which the disciples here mentioned are said expressly to have been informed of. Luke indeed tells us of a second journey which Peter made to the sepulchre; and this some have supposed to be the journey which the disciples going to Emmaus had in their eye, because it is related immediately after the report of the women concerning the angels, as if it had happened in consequence of that report. Nevertheless, the series of the history discovers the fallacy of this supposition. For when the women came into the city, after having seen the angels, both Peter and John were at the sepulchre, and did not return before the women set out the second time. If so, neither Peter nor John had any opportunity of hearing from the womens own mouth what they had to say concerning the vision, till the latter were able to add the still more welcome news of their having seen the Lord. Wherefore, since the disciples of whom Cleophas and his companion speak, had heard nothing of Christ's appearing to the women, Peter could not be one of them. It may be said indeed, that immediately on his return from the sepulchre he went back again with John, or some other of the disciples, in consequence of the womens report delivered to him at second hand by his brethren. Yet this is not very probable, because the disciples in question must have ran so fast, as to return from the sepulchre and make their report, before either Mary Magdalene or the company of women came from their several interviews with Jesus. Of this, I think, no doubt can be made, since Cleophas, who left the city before the women arrived, tells us he had heard that report.

Luke xxiv. 25. "Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! 26. Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory? From this reproof it would appear, that Cleophas and his companion were of the number of those who gave little credit to the tidings which the women had brought of their Master's resurrec tion. His crucifixion and death, as they themselves acknowledged, having almost convinced them that he was not the Messiah, they had little faith in his resurrection. Wherefore, to shew them their error, Jesus reproved them sharply for not understanding and believing the prophecies, which, said he, declare it to be the decree of heaven, that before Messiah enters into his glory, that is, before he receives his kingdom, he must suffer such things as you say your Master has suffered.--Moreover, that

his reproof might appear well founded, that their drooping spirits might be supported, and that they might be prepared for the discovery he was about to make of himself, he explained the whole types and prophecies of the Old Testament which relate to Messiah's sufferings; such as the Mosaical sacrifices, the lifting up of the brazen serpent, the 22d Psalm, the 53d of Isaiah, &c. 27. And beginning at Moses, and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the Scriptures, the things concerning himself. Thus did Jesus demonstrate to his desponding disciples, from the Scriptures, that their despair was without cause, and the suspicion without foundation, which they had taken up of his being a deceiver, because the priests had put him to death. His discourse made a deep impression on them, (ver. 32.) and engrossed their attention to such a degree, that they neither thought of the length of the journey, nor considered the countenance of him who spake to them; so that, ere they were aware, they arrived at the village whither they went. And now the disciples turned aside from the road to go to their lodging, Jesus in the mean time travelling on. But they, loth to part with a person whose conversation charmed them so much, begged him to go no farther, but to abide with them, because the day was far spent. Luke xxiv. 28. And they drew nigh unto the village whither they went; and he made as though he would have gone further: 29. But they constrained him, saying, Abide with us, for it is towards evening *, and the day is far spent. And he went in to tarry with them. By their hearty invitations, the disciples prevailed with their fellow-traveller to turn in with them; and their humanity met with an abundant recompence, for Jesus made himself known to them at table, in the action of giving God thanks for their food. 30. And it came to pass as he sat at meat with them, he took bread and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them. Because it is said, that " as he sat at meat he took bread, and blessed it," &c. some have thought that our Lord gave his two disciples the sacrament on this occasion, adding it to the ordinary meal they

were

• Ver. 29. It is towards evening, and the day is far spent.] In the following section we are told, that the disciples having returned from Emmaus, were telling their brethren what had happened to them, when Jesus stood in the midst and saluted them. Moreover, it is taken notice of that this appearance happened the first day of the week, at even. These circum stances, together with the departure of the disciples who went to Emmaus before the news of Christ's resurrection had reached the city, shew plainly, that by the evening, in the above passage, we are to understand the first evening of the Jewish day, which began at three o'clock. (Matt. xiv. 15. $6e.) It is towards evening, that is, it is towards three o'clock and the day is far spent ; nexλixer ʼn nμiga, the day has declined. For, on any other supposition, the two could not have returned to Jerusalem, after dining at Emmaus, so as to have been present when Jesus shewed himself to his dis ciples the first day of the week, which ended at sun-setting. See note, p. 814.

were eating, as at the first institution of the rite, and that they knew him thereby to be Jesus. But in the Greek there is no foundation for the conjecture, the words signifying properly, And it came to pass that when he sat down to table with them, he took bread, and blessed it, &c. Among the Jews the giving of thanks at table for their food, and the distributing of it to the guests, was the head of the family's office; but in mixed companies, he whose rank and character rendered him most worthy of the honours of the table obtained them. The actions therefore of blessing, breaking, and dividing the meat, happened of course at every meal, and at this were fitly yielded to their Master by the disciples, although they did not know him; because the singular skill in the sacred writings which he had discovered on the road made them conceive a very high opinion of his piety and learning. Jesus being thus desired by his disciples to address God in their behalf, he discovered himself either by pronouncing a form of prayer which they had often heard him use, and which, when repeated by this stranger, awakened their attention; so that, considering his features more narrowly, they knew him to be the Lord. This is Calvin's account. Or they might be led to the discovery, if in his prayer Jesus uttered such things as made him known. 31. And their eyes were opened, and they knew him: and he vanished out of their sight. Though our Lord's departure is mentioned immediately after we are told how he discovered himself, it does not follow that he went away immediately. upon the discovery. This the manner of the sacred historians. We may therefore suppose that he staid some time conversing with the two disciples, and proving to them the reality of his resurrection. The reflection which the disciples made on this affair is natural and beautiful. Luke xxiv. 32. They said one to another, Did not our hearts burn within us while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the Scriptures? We were extremely stupid not to know him, when we found his discourses have that effect upon us which was peculiar to his teach ing. As soon as Jesus departed, the two disciples made all the haste they could to Jerusalem, that they might have the pleasure of acquainting their brethren with the agreeable news. But they were in some measure prevented. For immediately on their arVOL. II. 4 G

rival,

* Ver. 31. And he vanished out of their sight.] A PHYTOS EYEVITO απ' RUTWY. The scholiast upon Euripides explains aparros eyevere by aParns syeVETO, a phrase used by Josephus to signify one's escaping or getting out of sight, lib. xx. c. 8. § 6. διαδρασας εκ της μάχης, αφανής εγενετο. Besides, the learned Dr Sam. Chandler has produced passages from Anacreon and Pindar, in which the word «Perros is used to signify the sudden disappearing of an object, by what means soever that happens. He proposes, therefore, to correct the translation thus, He suddenly went away from them: that is to say, he slipt out of their company, without bidding them farewell, or sig nifying that he was not to return.