Page images
PDF
EPUB

MATT. XXVI.

MARK XIV.

JOHN XII. disciples saw it, they were some that had the house was filled had indignation, say- indignation within with the odour of the

ing, To what purpose themselves, and said, 4 ointment. Then saith 9 is this waste ? for this Why was this waste of one of his disciples,

ointment might have the ointment made ? Judas Iscariot, Sibeen sold for much, 5 for it might have been mon's son,

which and given to the poor.

sold for more than should betray. him, three hundred pence, 5 Why was not this ointand have been given ment sold for three to the poor. And

they hundred pence, and murmured against her, given to the poor?

6 This he said, not that

he cared for the poor ; but because he was a thief, and had the

bag, and bare what 10 When Jesus under- 6 And Jesus said, Let 7 was put therein. Then

stood it, he said unto her alone; why trou- said Jesus, Let her them, Why trouble ye ble ye her? she hath alone: against the day the woman? for she

wrought a good work of my burying hath hath wrought a good 7 on me. For ye have the 8 she kept this. For the 11 work upon me.

For poor with you always, poor always ye have ye have the poor al- and whensoever ye with you; but me ye ways with you; but

me will ye may do them have not always. ye have not always. good: but me ye have 12 For in that she hath 8 not always. She hath

poured this ointment done what she could :

on my body, she did it she is come aforehand 13 for my burial. Verily to anoint my body to

I say unto you, Where- 9 the burying. Verily soever this gospel shall I say unto you, Wherebe preached in the soever this gospel shall whole world, there shall be preached throughalso this, that this wo- out the whole world, man hath done, be told this also that she hath 3 Then entered Satan for a memorial of her.2 done shall be spoken into Judas surnamed

of for a memorial of Iscariot, being of the 14

Then one 10 her. And Judas Is- number of the twelve. of the twelve, called cariot, one of the 4 And he went his way, Judas Iscariot, went twelve, went unto the and communed with

unto the chief priests, chief priests, to betray the chief priests and 15 and said unto them, 11 him unto them. And captains, how he might

What will ye give me, when they heard it, betray him unto them. and I will deliver him they were glad, and 5 And they were glad, unto you?. And they promised to give him and covenanted to give covenanted with him money. And he sought 6 him money. And he

for thirty pieces of how he might conve- promised, and sought 16 silver.3 And from that niently betray him. opportunity to betray time he sought oppor

LUKE XXII.

him unto them in the tunity to betray him,

absence of the multitude.

| The disciples, or some of them, were indignant; but according to John's account it was Judas that found fault. He was actuated by a base motive; and probably his dissatisfaction led others, who did not know his real feelings, to show some uneasiness at the seeming waste of

the ointment, not being able fully to appreciate the affection of Mary in this memorable deed.

? In John 11. 2, we find a striking illustration of the fulfilment of this saying: see Note 5, $ 92.

3 Comp. Matt. 27. 9; Ex. 21. 32.

PART VIII.

THE FOURTH PASSOVER; OUR LORD'S PASSION; AND THE ACCOM

PANYING EVENTS UNTIL THE END OF THE JEWISH SABBATH.

TIME: Two Days.

INTRODUCTORY NOTE.-THE PASSOVER.

As the events of our Lord's passion were intimately connected with the celebration of the passover, it seems proper here to bring together, in one view, those circumstances relating to that festival, which may serve to illustrate the sacred history. A more complete article upon this whole subject (of which this Note is an abstract) was published by Dr. Robinson in the Bibliotheca Sacra for August, 1845, p. 405–436.

I. Time of killing the paschal lamb. The paschal lamb (or kid, Ex. 12. 5) was to be selected on the tenth day of the first month, Ex. 12. 3. On the fourteenth day of the same month, (called Abib in the Pentateuch, and later Nisan, Deut. 16. 1; Esth. 3. 7,) the lamb thus selected was to be killed, at a point of time designated by the expression, between the two evenings, (as in the marginal reading of our version,) Ex. 12. 6; Lev. 23. 5; Num. 9.3,5; or, as is elsewhere said, at evening about the going down of the sun, Deut. 16. 6. The same phrase, between the two evenings, is put for the time of the daily evening sacrifice, Ex. 29. 39,41; Num. 28. 4. The time thus marked was regarded by the Samaritans and Karaites, as being the interval between sunset and deep twilight; while the Pharisees and Rabbinists held the first evening to commence with the declining sun, and the second evening with the setting sun. Hence, according to the latter, the paschal lamb was to be killed in the interval between the ninth and eleventh hour, equivalent to our three and five o'clock p. m. That this was in fact the practice among the Jews in the time of our Lord, appears from the testimony of Josephus, Jos. B. J. 6. 9. 3. The daily evening sacrifice also was offered at the ninth hour, or three o'clock p. m., Jos. Antiq. 14. 4. 3. See Acts 3. 1.

The true time, then, of killing the passover in our Lord's time, was between the ninth and eleventh hour, or towards sunset, near the close of the fourteenth day of Nisan. II. Time of eating the passover. This was to be done the same evening.

“ And they shall eat the flesh in that night, roast with fire, and unleavened bread, and with bitter herbs shall they eat it," Ex. 12. 8. The Hebrews in Egypt ate the first passover, and struck the blood of the victims on their door-posts, on the evening before the last great plague; at midnight the Lord smote all the first-born; and in the morning the people broke up from Rameses on their march towards the Red Sea, viz.“on the fifteenth day of the first month, on the morrow after the passover,” Num. 33. 3.

It hence appears very definitely, that the paschal lamb was to be slain in the afternoon of the fourteenth day of the month; and was eaten the same evening, that is, on the evening which was reckoned to and began the fifteenth day.

III. Festival of unleavened bread. From Ex. 12. 17, 18, (comp. Deut. 16. 3, 4,) and from Lev. 23. 6, (comp. Num. 28. 17,) it appears, that the festival of unleavened bread began strictly with the passover meal, at or after sunset following the fourteenth day, and continued until sunset at the end of the twenty-first day. Comp. Jos. Ant. 3. 10. 5.

We have already seen that it was customary for the Jews, on the fourteenth day of Nisan, to cease from labour at or before midday, to put away all leaven out of their houses before noon, and to slay the paschal lamb towards the close of the day; see above, and Note on $ 132. Hence, in popular usage, the fourteenth day very naturally came to be reckoned as the beginning or first day of the festival. See Matt. 26. 17; Mark 14. INTRODUCTORY NOTE. 12; and Josephus also says, that the festival was celebrated for eight days. See Note on § 132.

It is hardly necessary to remark, that in consequence of the close mutual relation between the passover and the festival of unleavened bread, these terms are often used interchangeably, especially in Greek, for the whole festival, including both the paschal supper and the seven days of unleavened bread. See Luke 22. 1; John 6. 4; Acts 12. 3, 4. Jos. Ant. 2. 1. 3. Comp. B. J. 5. 3. 1.

IV. Other paschal sacrifices.

1. In Num. 28. 18—25, it is prescribed, that on the first and last days of the festival, the fifteenth and twenty-first of Nisan, there should be a holy convocation, in which “no manner of servile work” should be done. And on each of the seven days, besides the ordinary daily sacrifices of the sanctuary, there was to be " a burnt-offering unto the Lord; two young bullocks, and one ram, and seven lambs of the first year;" also a meatoffering, and “one goat for a sin-offering.” The first and last days of the festival, therefore, were each a day of convocation and of rest, and hence were strictly sabbaths ; distinct from the weekly sabbath, except when one of them happened to fall upon this latter.

2. On the morrow after this first day of rest or sabbath, that is, on the sixteenth day of Nisan, the first-fruits of the harvest were offered, together with a lamb as a burntoffering; Lev. 23. 10–12. This rite is expressly assigned by Josephus, in like manner, to the second day of the festival, the sixteenth of Nisan; Antiq. 3. 10. 5. The grain offered was barley; this being the earliest ripe, and its harvest occurring a week or two earlier than that of wheat; Jos. ib. Bibl. Res. in Palest. II. p. 99. Until this offering was made, no husbandman could begin his harvest; nor might any one eat of the new grain; Lev. 23. 14. It was therefore a rite of great importance; and in the time of our Lord and later was performed with many ceremonies. See Biblioth. Sacra, ib. p. 408. Comp. Lev. 2. 14—16. Jos. Ant. 3. 10. 5. Lightfoot, Hor. Heb. on Joh. 19. 31. Reland,

Antiqq. Sac. 4. 3. 8. 3. There was also another sacrifice connected with the passover, known among the later Hebrews as the Chagigah, or festival, 23; of which there are traces likewise in the Old Testament. It was a festive thank-offering, (Engl. Vers. peace-offering,) made by private individuals or families, in connexion with the passover, but distinct from the appointed public offerings of the temple. Such voluntary sacrifices or free-will offerings were provided for and regulated by the Mosaic law. The fat only was burned on the altar (Lev. 3.3, 9, 14); the priest had for his portion the breast and the right shoulder (Lev. 7. 29–34 ; 10. 14); and the remainder was eaten by the bringer with his family and friends in a festive manner, on the same or the next day; Lev. 7. 16–18; 22. 29, 30" ; Deut. 12. 17, 18, 27; 27.7. These private sacrifices were often connected with the public festivals, both in honour of the same, and as a matter of convenience; Num. 10. 10; Deut. 14. 26; 16. 11, 14. Comp. 1 Sam. 1. 3–5, 24, 25; 2. 12—16, 19. They might be eaten in any clean place within the city (Lev. 10. 14; Deut. 16. 11, 14); but those only might partake of them, as likewise of the passover, who were themselves ceremonially clean ; Num. 18. 11, 13; John 11. 55. Comp. Num. 9. 10—13; 2 Chr. 30. 18. Jos. B. J. 6. 9. 3.

Such voluntary private sacrifices in connexion with the passover seem to be implied in the Old Testament, in Deut. 16. 2; 2 Chr. 30. 22, 24; 35. 7–9. See more in Biblioth. Sacra, ib. p. 409, sq.. Hence, as being a sacrifice thus connected with a festival, these private free-will offerings were themselves called, at least by the later Hebrews, by the name Chagigah, i. e.a festival. The earlier Rabbins connect the Chagigah directly with Deut. 16. 2, as above. "Lightfoot, Hor. Heb. on Joh. 18. 28. There was, however, some difference of opinion among them, as to the particular day of the paschal festival on which the Chagigah ought to be offered, whether on the fourteenth or the fifteenth of Nisan; but the weight of authority was greatly in favour of the fifteenth day. Yet the later accounts of the mode of celebrating the paschal supper seem to imply, that a chagigah was ordinarily connected with that meal. Indeed, mention is made of a “Chagigah of the fourteenth day,” so called in distinction from the more important and formal ceremonial Chagigah of the passover festival ; which latter was not regularly offered until the fifteenth day, when the paschal supper had already been eaten. The former was then a mere voluntary oblation of thanksgiving, made for the purpose of enlarging and diversifying the passover meal. See Lightfoot, Ministerium Templi, 13. 4. ib. c. 14. Reland, Antiqq. Sac. 4. 2. 2.

INTRODUCTORY NOTE. V. The paschal supper. For a full account of this meal, both in its original institution and as it was probably celebrated in the time of our Lord, see Biblioth. Sacra, ib. p. 411, sq. That the Jews in the course of ages had neglected some of the original precepts, and also introduced various additional ceremonies, is evident from the manner in which our Lord celebrated the supper, as narrated by the evangelists. What all these additions were, we have no specific historical account from contemporary writers; yet the precepts preserved in the Mishnah, (compiled in the third century from earlier traditions,) probably refer to the most important of them, and serve to throw light upon some of the circumstances connected with the institution of the Lord's supper. See Lightfoot Minist. Templi, c. 13. Hor. Heb. in Matt. 26. 26, 27. Werner de poculo Benedict. in Ugolini Thesaur. T. XXX. See too Biblioth. Sac. 1. c. p. 411, sq.

According to these authorities, four cups of red wine, usually mingled with one fourth part of water, were drunk during the meal, and served to mark its progress. The first was merely preliminary, in connexion with a blessing invoked upon the day and upon the wine; and this corresponds to the cup mentioned in Luke 22. 17. Then followed ablutions, and the bringing in of bitter herbs, the unleavened bread, the roasted lamb, and also the Chagigah of the fourteenth day, and a broth or sauce made with spices. After this followed the instructions to the son, &c., respecting the passover; and the first part of the Hallel, or song of praise, (Psalms 113. 114.,) was repeated. The second cup was now drunk. Next came the blessing upon each kind of food, and the guests partook of the meal reclining; the paschal lamb being eaten last. Thanks were then returned, and the third cup drunk, called the cup of blessing. Comp. 1 Cor. 10. 16. The remainder of the Hallel (Psalms 115.–118.) was now repeated, and the fourth cup drunk; which was ordinarily the end of the celebration. Sometimes a fifth cup might be added, after repeating the great Hallel (Psalms 120.–137.).

The institution of the Lord's supper probably took place at the close of the proper meal, immediately before the third cup, or cup of ølessing, which would seem to have made part of it. Comp. 1 Cor. 10. 16.

VI. Did our Lord, the night in which he was betrayed, eat the passover with his disciples? Had we only the testimony of the first three evangelists, not a doubt upon this question could ever arise. Their language (see § 132) is full, explicit, and decisive, to the effect, that our Lord's last meal with his disciples was the regular and ordinary paschal supper of the Jews, introducing the festival of unleavened bread, on the evening after the fourteenth day of Nisan. Mark says expressly, 14. 12, when they killed the passover ; which, whether the subject they refer to the Jews or be indefinite, implies at least the regular and ordinary time of killing the paschal lamb. Luke's language is, if possible, still stronger in 22.7: “ Then came the day of unleavened bread, when the passover must be killed," i. e. according to law and custom. This marks of course the fourteenth day of Nisan; and on that same evening our Lord and his disciples sat down to that same passover meal, which had thus by his own appointment been prepared for them, and of which Jesus speaks expressly as the passover, Luke 22. 15. Philologically considered, there cannot be a shadow of doubt, that Matthew, Mark, and Luke intended to express, and do express, in the plainest terms, their testimony to the fact, that Jesus regularly partook of the ordinary and legal passover meal, on the evening after the fourteenth of Nisan, at the same time with all the Jews.

When, however, we turn to the Gospel of John, we seek in vain in this evangelist for any trace of the paschal supper, as such, in connexion with our Lord at that time. John narrates indeed (ch. 13.) our Lord's last meal with his disciples; which the attendant and subsequent circumstances show to have been the same with that which the other evangelists describe as the passover. Upon just that point, however, John is silent; but from this silence the inference can never be rightfully drawn, that this last meal was not the passover; any more than John's similar silence in respect to the Lord's supper warrants the conclusion that no such rite was ever instituted. John, as all admit, wrote his Gospel as a supplement to the others; and hence, in speaking of this last meal, he narrates only such circumstances as had not been fully set forth by the other evangelists. He does not describe this meal as being the passover, nor make any mention of the eucharist, because this had been done, in both cases, in the most explicit manner, by Matthew, Mark, and Luke. In this way the difference in the two reports of the same occasion is satisfactorily accounted for.

But there are a few expressions in John's Gospel, in connexion with this meal, and especially with our Lord's passion, which taken together might, at first view, and if we had only John, seem to imply, that on Friday, the day of our Lord's crucifixion, the INTRODUCTORY NOTE. regular and legal passover had not yet been eaten, but was still to be eaten on the evening after that day.

The point of the whole inquiry relates simply to the time of the passover. According to all the four evangelists, our Lord was crucified on Friday, the day before the Jewish sabbath; and his last meal with his disciples took place on the preceding evening, the same night in which he was betrayed. The simple question, therefore, at issue is, Did this Friday fall upon the fifteenth day of Nisan, or upon the fourteenth ? Or, in other words, did our Lord on the evening before his crucifixion eat the passover, as is testified by the first three evangelists; or was the passover still to be eaten on the evening after that day, as John might seem to imply? The second of these alternatives is supported by Greswell (Dissert. iv. vol. iii.), who maintains, from certain expressions in John, that the proper passover was eaten on the evening after our Lord was crucified, and that therefore his paschal supper with the disciples had been celebrated one day in anticipation of the regular time; but the first is advocated by Wieseler (Chron. Synopse, pp. 334—386), as well as by Robinson.

This question has been more or less a subject of discussion in the church ever since the earliest centuries ; chiefly with a view to harmonize the difficulties. It is only in recent years, that the alleged difference between John and the other evangelists has been urged to the extreme of attempting to make it irreconcilable.

John obviously wrote his Gospel as supplementary to the other three. He had them then before him, and was acquainted with their contents. He was aware that the other three evangelists had testified to the fact, that Jesus partook of the passover with his disciples. Did John believe, that their testimony on this point was wrong; and did he mean to correct it? If so, we should naturally expect to find some notice of the correction along with the mention of the meal itself, which John describes, as well as they. Indeed, that would have been the appropriate and only fitting place for such a correction. But John has nothing of the kind; and we are therefore authorized to maintain, that it was not John's purpose thus and there to correct or contradict the testimony of the other evangelists; and if not there, then much less by mere implication in other places and connexions.

Let us examine the passages referred to in John's Gospel; and see whether they require to be so understood or interpreted, as to present any appearance of discrepancy. They are the following:

(A) John 13. 1, "before the feast of the passover.” This form of expression, it is said, shows that our Lord's last meal with his disciples took place before the passover ; and could not, therefore, itself have been the paschal supper.

But we must here take into account the meaning of the Greek word thus rendered feast, the true and only proper signification of which is festival ; that is, it implies every where a yearly day or days of festive commemoration ; 'never a single meal or entertainment. So in Num. 28. 16, 17, where the paschal supper, prepared on the fourteenth of Nisan and eaten at evening, is distinguished from the festival (English version, feast) which began on the fifteenth and continued for seven days. See further Luke 2. 41; 22. 1.

In this view, the phrase in question does not mean “ before the paschal supper,” but “ before the festival of the passover," i. e. of unleavened bread (Luke 22. 1). It is equivalent, therefore, to the English festival-eve, and here marks the evening immediately before the festival proper, of seven days' continuance; on which evening, during the (paschal) supper, our Lord “manifested his love for his disciples unto the end,” by the touching symbolical act of washing their feet.

It is therefore evident, that this passage does not sustain the inference attempted to be drawn from it.

(B) John 18. 28," and they themselves (the Jews) went not into the judgment-hall, lest they should be defiled; but that they might eat the passover.” From this last phrase, it has been inferred, that the Jews were expecting to partake of the paschal supper the ensuing evening; and of course had not eaten it already.

But to bring out this inference, the phrase “ to eat the passover” must be taken in the most limited sense, “to eat the paschal supper.” This certainly cannot be necessary, unless the context requires such a limitation : which is not the case here.

The word passover, in the New Testament, is found in no less than three main significations : (a) The paschal lamb; Mark 14. 12; Luke 22.7; 1 Cor. 5. 7. (6) The paschal meal; Matt. 26. 18, 19; Luke 22. 8, 13; Heb. 11. 28. (6) The paschal festival, comprising the seven days of unleavened bread; Luke 22. 1; 2. 41, comp. 43; Matt. 26. 2;

ܙܙ

[ocr errors]
« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »