« AnteriorContinuar »
Mtxxvii.28. And they stripped him, and they put on him a scarlet Jerosalem.
robe '', John xix. 2. a purple robe, Mtxxvi).29. And when they had platted a crown of thorns ", they
put it upon his head, and a reed in his right hand : and
they bowed the knee before him,
him on the head. Jobo xix, 4.
Pilate therefore went forth again, and saith unto them,
other learned men, is very ingenious; but is unsupported by au-
(a) Vide Horne's Introd. (h) Campbell, on John xix. 14.
20 Thorns were the first produce of the earth after the fall of
Bishop Pearce and Michaelis are of opinion that the crown of thorns was not intended to be an instrument of punishment or torture to his head, but rather to render our Lord an object of ridicule; for which cause they also put a reed in his hand, by way of sceptre, and bowed their knees, pretending to do bim homage ; and that the crown was not probably of thorns, in our sense of the word. Mark xv. 17. and John xix. 5. term it sepavov aravālvov, which might be translated an acanthine crown, or wreath formed out of the branches of the herb acanthus, or bear's foot. This is a prickly plant, though not like thorns, in the common meaning of that word.
Doddridge, however, observes very justly on this idea, that if the soldiers wished only to insult Christ, a crown of straw would have equally answered that purpose. Unless they had intended to have added to the cruelties, it is difficult to know on what account the thorns should have been selected.
Jobo xix. 5. Then came Jesus forth, wearing the crown of thorns, Jerusalem.
and the purple robe. And Pilate saith unto them, Be
hold the man!
they cried out, saying, Crucify him, crucify him. Pilate
find no fault in bim.
law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of
And went again into the judgment-hall, and saith unto
me ? knowest thou not that I have power to crucify thee,
and have power to release thee?
against me, except it were given thee from above: there
fore he that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin.
the Jews cried out, saying, If thou let this man go, thou
speaketh against Cesar.
Jesus forth, and sat down in the judgment seat in a place
that is called the Pavement, but in the Hebrew, Gabbatha. 14.
And it was the preparation of the passover, and about
crucify him. Pilate saith unto them, Shall I crucify your
MATT. xxvii. part of ver. 26, 27.
27 -and gathered unto him the whole band.
15 -released Barabbas onto them-delivered Jesus-to be
16 —the soldiers into the hall
17 And they clothed him with purple, and platted a crown of thorns, and put it about his head;
11 Our Lord would not reveal his dignity to Pilate, because he would not have believed him, and because as a judge Pilate was only concerned with his innocence : noither had the time come, for an appeal to the Gentiles.
18 And began to salute him, Hail, King of the Jews ! Jerasales
19 And they smote him on the bead with a reed, and did spit
JOAN xix. ver. 2. and part of ver. 3.
3 And said, Hail, King of the Jews!-
Christ is led away from the Judgment-Hall of Pilate to
26-32. JOHN xix. part of ver. 16. and ver. 17.
on him, and led him out to crucify him.
the place of a skull, which is called in the Hebrew Gol
Alexander and Rufus ,
And there followed him a great company of people, and
32 By comparing these two passages we obtain one of those innumerable minor, yet important proofs of the authenticity of the Scriptures, which demonstrate the impossibility of their being forgeries. St. Luke, who wrote for the Gentiles of Asia, merely mentions the name and country of Simon, wbo was probably known to the early Christians by character. St. Mark, bowever, who addressed himself at the dictation of St. Peter (by whose name therefore this Gospel might more properly be called) to the converts at Rome, adds, that Simon was the father of Alexander and Rufus, the latter of wbom being a well known member of the Roman Church, inquiries might be made by the people, of Rufus bimself, respecting the circum. stances of the crucifixion, wbich he in all probability would have received from his father. Rufus is saluted by St. Paul in his Epistle to the Romans (ch. xvi. 13.) which was written many years after the Gospel of St. Mark.
salem, weep not for me, but weep for yourselves, and for Jerusalem.
shall say, Blessed are the barren, and the wombs that
paps which never gave suck.
us; and to the hills, Cover us.
be done in the dry?
MATT. xxvii. part of ver. 31, 32.
MARK XV. part of ver. 20, 21.
LUKE xxiii. 33. 38. JOHN xix. 18-22.
that is to say, a place of a skull,
They gave him vinegar to drink mingled with gall: and
when he had tasted thereof, he would not drink. Mark xv.23.
And they gave him to drink wine mingled with myrrh: but he received it not a.
* The Jews always gave wine with incense in it, to stupisy and intoxicate the criminal. The custom originated in the precept Prov. xxxi. 6. “ Give strong drink unto him that is ready to perish,” i. e. "to bim who is condemned to death.” It would appear from the preceding narrative, that three potions were certainly oflered to our Lord, two when he arrived at Golgotha, Matt. xxvii. 34. and Mark xy. 23. and the third after he had beep for some time on the cross. The first draught, vinegar mingled with gall, was most probably offered to him in malice, and derision of his sufferings; our Lord refusing to drink of it, the intoxicating draught which was usual on such occasions, was then presented; but he declined tasting of either, and drank oply of the third, the vinegar, or posca, the common driok of the Roman soldiers; and which was placed in a vessel near the cross, for their accommodation.
He was faint and exhausted in body, and though his powers of mind were the same, he required that his humanity should receive the refresbment proffered to him by the bystander.
Altbougb, as we have seen, there appears no difficulty or discrepancy in the acconnts of St. Matthew and St. Mark, Mi. chaelis does not hesitate to assert, that there exists a manifest contradiction. He has consequently endeavoured by conjecture to reconcile the supposed difference, and has had the sin. gular misfortune to be reluted by himself, by his editor Bishop
La.xxiii.33. And when they were come to the place which is called Jerusalem.
Calvary, there they crucified him, and the malefactors,
Marsh, who has substituted an equally untenable conjecture,
sweet wine;" if so, the difference only consisted in the points; for the same word, which, when pronounced "ball,” signifies “sweet,” denotes as soon as it is pronounced hala, “ vinegar.” The translator of St. Matthew's Gospel misunderstood the words of the original, but St. Mark has given the true account.
In this criticism, Michaelis may be considered as having refuted himself; for he tells us, p. 151, that as the Hebrew origi. nal of St. Matthew is lost, a comparison can never be instituted between that and the Greek version : and this comparison ALONE can decide the question if there is any variation between them. It must be observed in answer, it is not possible to ascertain certainly whether St. Matthew wrote in Hebrew or not.
Bishop Marsh bas remarked, that the proposed Chaldee read-
which ,חמרא and that ,חמרא חליט במורא original Chaldee text was