MATT. XXVII. JOHN XIX. 31 THE Jews therefore, because it was the preparation-day, in order that the bodies might not remain upon the cross on the sabbath, (for the day of that sabbath was a great day), entreated Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away. 32 The soldiers came therefore, and brake the legs of the first, and of the other that was crucified with him. 33 But when they came to Jesus, and saw that he was already dead, they brake not his legs: 34 but one of the soldiers with his spear pierced his side, and straightway there came forth blood and water. 35 And he that saw it hath borne testimony, (and his testimony is true, and he knoweth that he saith true), that ye also might believe. 36 For these things were done that the scripture Ex. 12; 46. should be fulfilled, 'A bone of it shall not be broken.' 37 And again, another scripture saith, Zech. 12: 10 They shall look on him whom they pierced.' SECT. XVI. The Burial of Jesus. MARK XV. 42 AND when it was LUKE XXIII. 50 AND, behold, 57 Now when it was evening, there now evening, be- there was a man, by came a rich man from cause it was the pre-name Joseph, who Arimathea, whose paration - day, (that was a councillor,* a name was Joseph, is, the day before the good and righteous JOHN XIX. 38 Now after these things, Joseph of Arimathea, (who was a disciple of Jesus, but secretly through fear who also was himself sabbath)," 43there came man, 51 (this man of the Jews), entreated not consented | Pilate that he might a disciple of Jesus. Joseph of Arimathea, had • Or, member of the Sanhedrim, Bovλevrns. MATT. XXVII. 58 This man went to Pilate, and asked for the body of Jesus. Then Pilate MARK XV. also LUKE XXIII. an honourable coun- to their counsel and JOHN XIX. take away the body their deed), from Ari- of Jesus: and Pilate mathea, a city of the gave him leave. He Jews, who also him- came therefore, and self was waiting for took away the body the kingdom of God of Jesus. 39 And there 52 this man went unto came also Nicodemus, Pilate, and asked for (he that at the first the body of Jesus. came to Jesus by 53 And having taken night), bringing a it down, he wrapped mixture of myrrh and it in fine linen, and aloes, in weight about laid it in a sepulchre a hundred pounds. + hewn in stone, where- 40 They took therein no one had ever fore the body of Jesus, yet lain. 54 And and bound it in linen that day was the pre- bands with the spices, paration-day, and the as the manner of the sabbath drew on. Jews is to prepare for 55 And the women burial. 41 Now in the also, who had come place where he was with him from Gali- crucified there was a lee, followed after, garden: and in the observed the garden a new sepul. been hewn out of a sepulchre, and how clire, wherein no rock, and rolled a stone his body was laid. one unto the entrance 56 And they returned, sepulchre.§ and prepared spices Magdalene was there, 47 And Mary Mag- and balsams; and manded the body he knew the fact from the centurion, he stone to the entrance of the sepulchre, and departed. Now Mary of the and the other Mary, sitting over against the sepulchre.§ dalene and Mary the they rested on the had ever yet been laid. • Or, a man of great estimation, a member of the Sanhedrim. + St. John alone mentions Nicodemus, and the situation of the sepulchre. tit. dawned, εTEOWOKε. This word strictly refers to the dawning light of morning; so Matt. xxviii. 1: but it appears (see Kuinoel) that the Jews lighted up lamps at the approach of the sabbath; and the use of the word may possibly have been caused by that circumstance. § In Matt. xxvii. 61, 64, 66, and xxviii. 1, rapoc is employed; but in all other instances (except Luke xxviii. 53) μvnμelov, which has hitherto been rendered tomb. From the associations with the word sepulchre in relation to the tomb of Jesus, both of the Greek words are rendered by it. NOTE ON SECT. X. The Denials of Peter. (Pp. 261, 2.) EACH Evangelist appears to have had in view to record three instances in which Peter denied Christ; but it is clear that they had not all the same idea of the details. This might be expected from the circumstances of the time and place; from the absence of all witnesses except the officers and servants of the High Priest; from the period that would elapse before the facts would be retraced, as a matter of history; from the inability of any one, except the Apostle himself, to state, in regular succession, all the occurrences that took place; and from the difficulty which he must have felt to retrace them in order and detail, occurring as they did in the midst of terror and agitation, and followed as they were by overwhelming remorse, and shame, and anguish. From the connection of the Evangelist Mark with the Apostle, as well as from the characteristics of his record, it is probable that this is the most accordant with Peter's own impression of the leading circumstances. Mark alone records the first crowing of the cock, which, as recalling the warning, so much aggravates the evil of Peter's fall; and he speaks of the maid-servant (ǹ raidiokη) who occasioned his second denial, as if she were the same (μia тwv пaidiskov) that first accosted him.-St Matthew's account consists, it may be conjectured, of what he learnt from his fellow Apostle, while they still sojourned with one another; together, probably, with some information from persons concerned in the transaction: he gives it less in detail, (according to his custom in recording events); but he states that the second denial was accompanied with an oath; and he speaks of the damsel who occasioned it as another (an), thus distinguishing her from that one who occasioned the first denial. In other respects, these two Evangelists so fully agree, that the chief source of their record must have been the same.- St. Luke gives the first denial briefly, but in accordance with the account of the preceding Gospels. What he records as the second, was occasioned by the assertion of a man; but this may have instantly followed upon the occurrence recorded by the other Evangelists; and may have been communicated by the person himself: it is to be regarded as a part of the second denial. In the third, Luke agrees, in substance, with the other two: but he specifies the interval that elapsed between it and the second; and he adds a most interesting circumstance, which must have been derived from some observant witness of the proceedings before the High Priest. The hall of audience, as appears from Mark, ver. 66, was raised above the court, (or open area), in which the officers had made the fire, and where Peter was; and from Luke, ver. 61, it obviously looked into that court: at the furthest end of the hall would be the tribunal of the High Priest; and Jesus, while standing before him, would have his back turned towards the court. The sacred historian, after recording the third denial, states that 'immediately the cock crew,' and adds, with his usual impressive simplicity, And the Lord turned and looked on Peter.' If Peter observed this look, one can scarcely account for the fact's not being noticed by St. Mark; it surely could never have been forgotten by him: but it was very natural for the recording witness of it to connect it with Peter's immediately rushing out from the court; and at any rate, it shows that, while continually required to attend to the proceedings respecting himself, the Lord was not forgetful of his poor Apostle.—The Apostle John, (whom some suppose to have been the disciple' mentioned in ver. 15,) alone records what passed when our Lord was first brought into the hall of the High Priest; and he interweaves with his record of it, what he knew respecting Peter. He also records three denials; but it is probable that what he mentions first, corresponds with the second of Matthew and Mark; and the two other denials which he specifies, correspond, in time, with their third denial.-It is interesting to observe that this Apostle, who seems desirous to record enough to show the fulfilment of our Lord's prophecy, confines himself to the simple fact, and does not mention the dreadful and aggravating circumstances of it. On the whole, the train of circumstances seems to be as follows. Peter was brought into the outer porch of the palace by another disciple, who spoke for him to the damsel that kept the door: this would make him known to her, and perhaps to some other maid-servants with her. He then went into the court where the officers and servants kindled a fire to warm themselves. There he appears to have principally been for the next hour, sometimes sitting, sometimes standing: and there he would have a partial view of the hall of audience, imperfectly lighted by the torches and lamps of the attendants; and would witness a constant burrying backwards and forwards, of members of the Sanhedrim, of officers and messengers, of persons coming as witnesses, &c. Every thing external, was obscurity, haste, and agitation; and the circumstances in the garden of Gethsemane, from the time when the enemies of Christ entered with the treacherous Apostle-preceded as they had been by the heavy sleep of a wearied spirit, and followed as they were by a hasty flight, and then an anxious curiosity to see the issue, all had aided to prepare for the accomplishment of the thrice-given prediction. One of the maid-servants, who, we may suppose, had seen him introduced as a stranger, and had observed his hurried manner and perturbed countenance, accosted him while sitting at the fire: this led to his first denial; and he hastily went to the entrance-court (or porch) of the palace, as if to go away. He now had the first signal for watchfulness and caution; for while he was in the porch, a cock crew. Here, it seems, he was again charged by a maid-servant, (now, clearly the one that kept the door), with having been with Jesus: but he denied it with an oath and one of the bystanders immediately asserting the same thing, he denied it to him also. He then went again to the fire in the court; and after some time, (Luke says, 'about an hour,' Matthew and Mark say 'a little while,'-in such circumstances it is not easy to measure time with exactness), he was again charged with being one of the followers of Jesus. This led to his last denial or series of denials. Combining the accounts of the four Evangelists, we may state the concluding scene of Peter's fall as follows. As he was standing by the fire, one of the persons present said to him, 'Art not thou also one of this man's disciples?' he replied, I am not.' Another, who happened to be kinsman of the man whose ear Peter had smote off in Gethsemane, said, 'Did I not see thee in the garden with him?' he denied this also. The bystanders, however, now felt convinced, by his Galilean dialect, that he was one of the followers of Jesus; and one of them, in particular, confidently affirmed it on this ground. The result is impressively stated by each of the first three Evangelists; and, very briefly by the last. Matthew and Mark have recorded the denials of Peter, after they have stated the occurrences respecting Christ which took place in the High Priest's palace: and this, though it neglects the order of time, is the most convenient method, and is here followed. This arrangement requires the transposition of ver. 63-65 in Luke; which portion clearly belongs to those occurrences. |