John · Chapter 19

V. 1. Matthew 27:26; Mark 15:15.

Verse 1. Pilate took Jesus, and scourged him.] That is, caused him to be scourged: for we cannot with Bede suppose that he scourged him with his own hand.

As our Lord was scourged by order of Pilate, it is probable he was scourged in the Roman manner, which was much more severe than that of the Jews. The latter never gave more than thirty-nine blows; for the law had absolutely forbidden a man to be abused, or his flesh cut in this chastisement, Deuteronomy 25:3. The common method of whipping or flogging in some places, especially that of a military kind, is a disgrace to the nation where it is done, to the laws, and to humanity. See Matthew 27:26, and the note there. Though it was customary to scourge the person who was to be crucified, yet it appears that Pilate had another end in view by scourging our Lord. He hoped that this would have satisfied the Jews, and that he might then have dismissed Jesus. This appears from Luke 23:16.

Verses 1-3. Pilate therefore took Jesus, and scourged him — The Romans usually scourged the criminals whom they condemned to be crucified, which was the reason why Pilate ordered our Lord to be scourged before he delivered him up to suffer that punishment. See note on Matthew 27:26. And the soldiers platted a crown of thorns — Intending thereby to add cruelty to scorn. See on Matthew 27:29. They put on him a purple robe — Or, a purple mantle, as Dr. Campbell renders imatio porfuroun. It is called, Matthew 27:28, a scarlet cloak, clamuda kokkinhn. “The names denoting the colour of the garment, ought to be understood with all the latitude common in familiar conversation. This cloak, in strictness, may have been neither purple nor scarlet, and yet have had so much of each, as would naturally lead one to give it one of these names, and another the other.” And they smote him with their hands — Matthew says, They took a reed which they had put into his right hand, and smote him on the head. And Mark also says, They smote him on the head with a reed. It seems some smote him with a reed on his head, laying their blows upon the thorns, and driving the prickles thereof into his temples. And others smote him with their hands on his cheeks, or some other part of his body. See note on Matthew 27:29, 30; Mark 15:19.

Verse 1. Pilate therefore took Jesus and scourged him, as stated in Matthew 27:26. In cases where this preseded crucifixion, Cicero has recited the form of the sentence from the Roman law. I, lictor, colliga manus, caput obnubito, arbori infelici suspendito. Go, lictor, tie his hands, cover his head, suspend him to the unhappy tree. — Those punishments on persons apprehended for robberies and sedition, were usually inflicted with great severity. All this Isaiah had foreseen, when he said, I gave my back to the smiters, and my cheeks to those that plucked off the hair. I hid not my face from shame and spitting. Isaiah 50:6. Another prophet had also said, The ploughers ploughed on my back, they made long their furrows. Psalm 129:3.

DELIVERS HIM FOR CRUCIFIXION, 1-16.

Matthew 27:24-31; Mark 15:15-20; Luke 23:23-25.

1. Scourged him—The punishment of personal scourging with whips, rods, or cords, disused by modern civilization, is of high antiquity. The monuments show that it was a custom in ancient Egypt. It was legalized by Moses, but humanely limited to forty lashes, which the modern Jews, to avoid even an accidental overstepping of the law, limited to thirty-nine. Though not among the Jews a disgraceful punishment, it was held by the Roman law unworthy to be inflicted on a Roman citizen. The victim was bound to a low pillar, in order that, stooping forward, he might curve his bare back to receive the full fair stroke. It was customarily inflicted before crucifixion, and no limit was fixed by Roman law to the number of the blows. It has been questioned whether Pilate intended this to be the scourging preceding crucifixion, or whether it was intended as a sole punishment; whether as a compromise, according to Luke xxiii, 16, or whether he hoped, by presenting Jesus under the cruel effects of the scourge before their eyes, he might melt them to pity. But it appears by Luke xxiii, 25 that, at the close of the affair by their choice of Barabbas, he delivered Jesus to their will; so that this is probably the scourging preparatory to crucifixion. The presenting Jesus therefore so scourged, to induce their pity, was doubtless an afterthought.

Verse 2. Platted a crown of thorns] See Clarke on “Matthew 27:29”.

Verses 1-3. Pilate therefore took Jesus, and scourged him — The Romans usually scourged the criminals whom they condemned to be crucified, which was the reason why Pilate ordered our Lord to be scourged before he delivered him up to suffer that punishment. See note on Matthew 27:26. And the soldiers platted a crown of thorns — Intending thereby to add cruelty to scorn. See on Matthew 27:29. They put on him a purple robe — Or, a purple mantle, as Dr. Campbell renders imatio porfuroun. It is called, Matthew 27:28, a scarlet cloak, clamuda kokkinhn. “The names denoting the colour of the garment, ought to be understood with all the latitude common in familiar conversation. This cloak, in strictness, may have been neither purple nor scarlet, and yet have had so much of each, as would naturally lead one to give it one of these names, and another the other.” And they smote him with their hands — Matthew says, They took a reed which they had put into his right hand, and smote him on the head. And Mark also says, They smote him on the head with a reed. It seems some smote him with a reed on his head, laying their blows upon the thorns, and driving the prickles thereof into his temples. And others smote him with their hands on his cheeks, or some other part of his body. See note on Matthew 27:29, 30; Mark 15:19.

DELIVERS HIM FOR CRUCIFIXION, 1-16.

Matthew 27:24-31; Mark 15:15-20; Luke 23:23-25.

1. Scourged him—The punishment of personal scourging with whips, rods, or cords, disused by modern civilization, is of high antiquity. The monuments show that it was a custom in ancient Egypt. It was legalized by Moses, but humanely limited to forty lashes, which the modern Jews, to avoid even an accidental overstepping of the law, limited to thirty-nine. Though not among the Jews a disgraceful punishment, it was held by the Roman law unworthy to be inflicted on a Roman citizen. The victim was bound to a low pillar, in order that, stooping forward, he might curve his bare back to receive the full fair stroke. It was customarily inflicted before crucifixion, and no limit was fixed by Roman law to the number of the blows. It has been questioned whether Pilate intended this to be the scourging preceding crucifixion, or whether it was intended as a sole punishment; whether as a compromise, according to Luke xxiii, 16, or whether he hoped, by presenting Jesus under the cruel effects of the scourge before their eyes, he might melt them to pity. But it appears by Luke xxiii, 25 that, at the close of the affair by their choice of Barabbas, he delivered Jesus to their will; so that this is probably the scourging preparatory to crucifixion. The presenting Jesus therefore so scourged, to induce their pity, was doubtless an afterthought.

Verses 1-3. Pilate therefore took Jesus, and scourged him — The Romans usually scourged the criminals whom they condemned to be crucified, which was the reason why Pilate ordered our Lord to be scourged before he delivered him up to suffer that punishment. See note on Matthew 27:26. And the soldiers platted a crown of thorns — Intending thereby to add cruelty to scorn. See on Matthew 27:29. They put on him a purple robe — Or, a purple mantle, as Dr. Campbell renders imatio porfuroun. It is called, Matthew 27:28, a scarlet cloak, clamuda kokkinhn. “The names denoting the colour of the garment, ought to be understood with all the latitude common in familiar conversation. This cloak, in strictness, may have been neither purple nor scarlet, and yet have had so much of each, as would naturally lead one to give it one of these names, and another the other.” And they smote him with their hands — Matthew says, They took a reed which they had put into his right hand, and smote him on the head. And Mark also says, They smote him on the head with a reed. It seems some smote him with a reed on his head, laying their blows upon the thorns, and driving the prickles thereof into his temples. And others smote him with their hands on his cheeks, or some other part of his body. See note on Matthew 27:29, 30; Mark 15:19.

DELIVERS HIM FOR CRUCIFIXION, 1-16.

Matthew 27:24-31; Mark 15:15-20; Luke 23:23-25.

1. Scourged him—The punishment of personal scourging with whips, rods, or cords, disused by modern civilization, is of high antiquity. The monuments show that it was a custom in ancient Egypt. It was legalized by Moses, but humanely limited to forty lashes, which the modern Jews, to avoid even an accidental overstepping of the law, limited to thirty-nine. Though not among the Jews a disgraceful punishment, it was held by the Roman law unworthy to be inflicted on a Roman citizen. The victim was bound to a low pillar, in order that, stooping forward, he might curve his bare back to receive the full fair stroke. It was customarily inflicted before crucifixion, and no limit was fixed by Roman law to the number of the blows. It has been questioned whether Pilate intended this to be the scourging preceding crucifixion, or whether it was intended as a sole punishment; whether as a compromise, according to Luke xxiii, 16, or whether he hoped, by presenting Jesus under the cruel effects of the scourge before their eyes, he might melt them to pity. But it appears by Luke xxiii, 25 that, at the close of the affair by their choice of Barabbas, he delivered Jesus to their will; so that this is probably the scourging preparatory to crucifixion. The presenting Jesus therefore so scourged, to induce their pity, was doubtless an afterthought.

Verses 4-7. Pilate went forth again — Although he had given sentence that it should be as the Jews desired, and had delivered Jesus to the soldiers, to be scourged and crucified, he thought, if he were shown to the people in the condition in which he now was, covered with blood and wounds through the scourges, spit upon, crowned with thorns, &c., they might yet relent and let him go. And that the impression might be stronger, he went out himself and spoke to them, saying, Behold, I bring him forth, &c. — Though I have sentenced him to die, and have scourged him as one that is to be crucified, I bring him forth to you this once, that I may testify to you again how fully I am persuaded of his innocence, and that you may have an opportunity to save his life. Upon this Jesus appeared on the pavement, having his face, hair, and shoulders all clotted with blood, and the purple robe bedaubed with spittle: when Pilate said, Behold the man! But all was to no purpose. The priests, whose rage and malice had extinguished, not only the sentiments of justice and feelings of pity natural to the human heart, but that love which countrymen usually bear to one another, no sooner saw Jesus than, fearing, perhaps, lest the fickle populace might relent, they cried out with all their might, Crucify him! Crucify him! Pilate saith, Take ye him and crucify him — He seems to have uttered these words in anger, vexed at finding the chief priests and rulers thus obstinately bent on the destruction of a person from whom they had nothing to fear that was dangerous either to the church or state. But they refused this offer also, perhaps “thinking it dishonourable to receive permission to punish one who had been more than once publicly declared innocent by his judge. Besides, they considered with themselves that the governor afterward might have called it sedition, as the permission had been extorted from him. Wherefore they told him, that though none of the things alleged against the prisoner were true, he had committed such a crime in the presence of the council itself, as by their law (Leviticus 24:16) deserved the most ignominious death. He had spoken blasphemy, calling himself the Son of God, a title which no mortal could assume without the highest degree of guilt. And therefore, said they, since by our law blasphemy merits death, and though Cesar is our ruler, he governs us by our own laws, you ought by all means to crucify this blasphemer.” It is evident they must have understood our Lord as using the title, Son of God, in the highest sense, otherwise they could not have accounted his applying it to himself blasphemy.

4. Went forth again—After Jesus returned from Herod, Pilate again took him into the inner apartments where the scourging took place, and the multitudes still stood in the front court of the palace. Pilate now brings forth Jesus in his most piteous plight, and, probably, mounting the gallery or balustrade slightly projecting over the court, presents him in an elevated position to their view.

Verse 5. And Pilate saith] The word Pilate, which we supply in our version, is added by one MS., the later Syriac, later Arabic, and the Coptic. Behold the man!] The man who, according to you, affects the government, and threatens to take away the empire from the Romans. Behold the man whom ye have brought unto me as an enemy to Cæsar, and as a sower of the seeds of sedition in the land! In him I find no guilt; and from him ye have no occasion to fear any evil.

Verses 4-7. Pilate went forth again — Although he had given sentence that it should be as the Jews desired, and had delivered Jesus to the soldiers, to be scourged and crucified, he thought, if he were shown to the people in the condition in which he now was, covered with blood and wounds through the scourges, spit upon, crowned with thorns, &c., they might yet relent and let him go. And that the impression might be stronger, he went out himself and spoke to them, saying, Behold, I bring him forth, &c. — Though I have sentenced him to die, and have scourged him as one that is to be crucified, I bring him forth to you this once, that I may testify to you again how fully I am persuaded of his innocence, and that you may have an opportunity to save his life. Upon this Jesus appeared on the pavement, having his face, hair, and shoulders all clotted with blood, and the purple robe bedaubed with spittle: when Pilate said, Behold the man! But all was to no purpose. The priests, whose rage and malice had extinguished, not only the sentiments of justice and feelings of pity natural to the human heart, but that love which countrymen usually bear to one another, no sooner saw Jesus than, fearing, perhaps, lest the fickle populace might relent, they cried out with all their might, Crucify him! Crucify him! Pilate saith, Take ye him and crucify him — He seems to have uttered these words in anger, vexed at finding the chief priests and rulers thus obstinately bent on the destruction of a person from whom they had nothing to fear that was dangerous either to the church or state. But they refused this offer also, perhaps “thinking it dishonourable to receive permission to punish one who had been more than once publicly declared innocent by his judge. Besides, they considered with themselves that the governor afterward might have called it sedition, as the permission had been extorted from him. Wherefore they told him, that though none of the things alleged against the prisoner were true, he had committed such a crime in the presence of the council itself, as by their law (Leviticus 24:16) deserved the most ignominious death. He had spoken blasphemy, calling himself the Son of God, a title which no mortal could assume without the highest degree of guilt. And therefore, said they, since by our law blasphemy merits death, and though Cesar is our ruler, he governs us by our own laws, you ought by all means to crucify this blasphemer.” It is evident they must have understood our Lord as using the title, Son of God, in the highest sense, otherwise they could not have accounted his applying it to himself blasphemy.

Ver. 5, 6. Then came Jesus forth, wearing the crown of thorns, and the purple robe. And Pilate said, behold the man. A sight designed by Pilate to excite compassion, but which roused the demon in the hearts of the rulers and their creatures, to cry, away with him, crucify him! Proofs the most impressive, that those who crucified the Lord were, as Paul says of some others, “given over to a reprobate mind.”

5. Behold the man—Ecce Homo! This solemn presentation of Jesus before the world, preceding his final delivery to death, has produced the most solemn impression upon the minds of the Church of all Christian ages. The pencils of the great masters of Christian art have selected it as a choice subject. Pre-eminently he stands forth the Man, the representative of the race, the memento of our sin, the exhibition of our misery.

Verse 6. Crucify HIM] auton, which is necessary to the text, and which is wanting in the common editions, and is supplied by our version in Italics, is added here on the authority of almost every MS. and version of importance. As it is omitted in the common editions, it affords another proof, that they were not taken from the best MSS.

Verses 4-7. Pilate went forth again — Although he had given sentence that it should be as the Jews desired, and had delivered Jesus to the soldiers, to be scourged and crucified, he thought, if he were shown to the people in the condition in which he now was, covered with blood and wounds through the scourges, spit upon, crowned with thorns, &c., they might yet relent and let him go. And that the impression might be stronger, he went out himself and spoke to them, saying, Behold, I bring him forth, &c. — Though I have sentenced him to die, and have scourged him as one that is to be crucified, I bring him forth to you this once, that I may testify to you again how fully I am persuaded of his innocence, and that you may have an opportunity to save his life. Upon this Jesus appeared on the pavement, having his face, hair, and shoulders all clotted with blood, and the purple robe bedaubed with spittle: when Pilate said, Behold the man! But all was to no purpose. The priests, whose rage and malice had extinguished, not only the sentiments of justice and feelings of pity natural to the human heart, but that love which countrymen usually bear to one another, no sooner saw Jesus than, fearing, perhaps, lest the fickle populace might relent, they cried out with all their might, Crucify him! Crucify him! Pilate saith, Take ye him and crucify him — He seems to have uttered these words in anger, vexed at finding the chief priests and rulers thus obstinately bent on the destruction of a person from whom they had nothing to fear that was dangerous either to the church or state. But they refused this offer also, perhaps “thinking it dishonourable to receive permission to punish one who had been more than once publicly declared innocent by his judge. Besides, they considered with themselves that the governor afterward might have called it sedition, as the permission had been extorted from him. Wherefore they told him, that though none of the things alleged against the prisoner were true, he had committed such a crime in the presence of the council itself, as by their law (Leviticus 24:16) deserved the most ignominious death. He had spoken blasphemy, calling himself the Son of God, a title which no mortal could assume without the highest degree of guilt. And therefore, said they, since by our law blasphemy merits death, and though Cesar is our ruler, he governs us by our own laws, you ought by all means to crucify this blasphemer.” It is evident they must have understood our Lord as using the title, Son of God, in the highest sense, otherwise they could not have accounted his applying it to himself blasphemy.

Ver. 5, 6. Then came Jesus forth, wearing the crown of thorns, and the purple robe. And Pilate said, behold the man. A sight designed by Pilate to excite compassion, but which roused the demon in the hearts of the rulers and their creatures, to cry, away with him, crucify him! Proofs the most impressive, that those who crucified the Lord were, as Paul says of some others, “given over to a reprobate mind.”

6. They cried… Crucify him—As Jesus stands the representative of suffering for sin, so these are the representative sinners. All our sins have cried, in the words of these men, “Crucify him, crucify him.” Take ye him—Crucify him then yourselves, Pilate in effect says, for I cannot perpetrate the deed. There is a tone of impatience in the words that shows how indignantly the Roman felt their exacting and obstinate cruelty.

V. 7. By our law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God-Which they understood in the highest sense, and therefore accounted blasphemy.

Verse 7. We have a law] In Leviticus 24:14-16, we find that blasphemers of God were to be put to death; and the chief priests having charged Jesus with blasphemy, they therefore voted that he deserved to die. See Matthew 26:65, 66. They might refer also to the law against false prophets, Deuteronomy 18:20.

The Son of God.] It is certain that the Jews understood this in a very peculiar sense. When Christ called himself the Son of God, they understood it to imply positive equality to the Supreme Being: and, if they were wrong, our Lord never attempted to correct them.

Verses 4-7. Pilate went forth again — Although he had given sentence that it should be as the Jews desired, and had delivered Jesus to the soldiers, to be scourged and crucified, he thought, if he were shown to the people in the condition in which he now was, covered with blood and wounds through the scourges, spit upon, crowned with thorns, &c., they might yet relent and let him go. And that the impression might be stronger, he went out himself and spoke to them, saying, Behold, I bring him forth, &c. — Though I have sentenced him to die, and have scourged him as one that is to be crucified, I bring him forth to you this once, that I may testify to you again how fully I am persuaded of his innocence, and that you may have an opportunity to save his life. Upon this Jesus appeared on the pavement, having his face, hair, and shoulders all clotted with blood, and the purple robe bedaubed with spittle: when Pilate said, Behold the man! But all was to no purpose. The priests, whose rage and malice had extinguished, not only the sentiments of justice and feelings of pity natural to the human heart, but that love which countrymen usually bear to one another, no sooner saw Jesus than, fearing, perhaps, lest the fickle populace might relent, they cried out with all their might, Crucify him! Crucify him! Pilate saith, Take ye him and crucify him — He seems to have uttered these words in anger, vexed at finding the chief priests and rulers thus obstinately bent on the destruction of a person from whom they had nothing to fear that was dangerous either to the church or state. But they refused this offer also, perhaps “thinking it dishonourable to receive permission to punish one who had been more than once publicly declared innocent by his judge. Besides, they considered with themselves that the governor afterward might have called it sedition, as the permission had been extorted from him. Wherefore they told him, that though none of the things alleged against the prisoner were true, he had committed such a crime in the presence of the council itself, as by their law (Leviticus 24:16) deserved the most ignominious death. He had spoken blasphemy, calling himself the Son of God, a title which no mortal could assume without the highest degree of guilt. And therefore, said they, since by our law blasphemy merits death, and though Cesar is our ruler, he governs us by our own laws, you ought by all means to crucify this blasphemer.” It is evident they must have understood our Lord as using the title, Son of God, in the highest sense, otherwise they could not have accounted his applying it to himself blasphemy.

Ver. 7-9. By our law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God. These words gave Pilate divine alarm. To a Roman they might be ambiguous, as the poets caused many of the more illustrious to be descended from Jove, or as our forefathers, from Odin. Pilate asked, whence art thou? What is thy descent; who are thy ancestors? To this enquiry Jesus gave no reply. To the apostles, after supper, he had made a full disclosure of his personal dignity and glory; but to Pilate he refused to be known. Otherwise, how had the scriptures been fulfilled?

7. We have a law—As much as to say, If you, as a Roman, do not feel his execution to be legal and just, we have plenty of law to sustain the infliction of death. Made himself the Son of God—To make himself the Son of God, and thereby equal with God, was blasphemy, for which the sentence was death by stoning. But now an unexpected result followed their utterance of the phrase Son of God. There can be no doubt that the personal demeanour of Jesus had an impressive effect upon Pilate. He appeared to the Roman a strangely supernatural being. The warning dream of his wife hung gloomily upon his feelings. Sceptics are often superstitious. Genuine religious feeling often being suppressed in their hearts, abnormal spiritual notions take their place. He puts to himself the startling query: May there not be something supernatural in this remarkable specimen among this half supernatural race?

V. 8. He was the more afraid-He seems to have been afraid before of shedding innocent blood.

Verse 8. He was the more afraid] While Jesus was accused only as a disturber of the peace of the nation, which accusation Pilate knew to be false, he knew he could deliver him, because the judgment in that case belonged to himself; but when the Jews brought a charge against him of the most capital nature, from their own laws, he then saw that he had every thing to fear, if he did not deliver Jesus to their will. The Sanhedrin must not be offended-the populace must not be irritated: from the former a complaint might be sent against him to Cæsar; the latter might revolt, or proceed to some acts of violence, the end of which could not be foreseen. Pilate was certainly to be pitied: he saw what was right, and he wished to do it; but he had not sufficient firmness of mind. He did not attend to that important maxim, Fiat justitia: ruat cælum. Let justice be done, though the heavens should be dissolved. He had a vile people to govern, and it was not an easy matter to keep them quiet. Some suppose that Pilate’s fear arose from hearing that Jesus had said he was the Son of God; because Pilate, who was a polytheist, believed that it was possible for the offspring of the gods to visit mortals; and he was afraid to condemn Jesus, for fear of offending some of the supreme deities. Perhaps the question in the succeeding verse refers to this.

Verses 8-12. When Pilate heard that saying, he was the more afraid — He before feared to shed innocent blood, and now he became more afraid than ever to take his life; suspecting, probably, that the account which he heard of him might be true, and that he might be a divine person. For doubtless he had heard of some of the many miracles which Jesus had performed, and now, it seems, began to think that perhaps what had been currently reported was true, and that he really had performed the wonderful works ascribed to him. For it is very well known, that the religion which the governor professed directed him to acknowledge the existence of demi-gods and heroes, or men descended from the gods. Nay, the heathen believed that their gods themselves sometimes appeared on earth, in the form of men, Acts 14:11, 12. Pilate, therefore, went again into the judgment-hall — Being resolved to act cautiously; and saith unto Jesus, Whence art thou? — That is, From whom art thou descended? or what is this divine original which thou art charged with claiming? But Jesus — Knowing that his innocence was already apparent, even to the conviction of Pilate’s conscience; gave him no answer — To that question. Indeed, Pilate’s ordering, or allowing such cruelties to be inflicted on a person he knew to be innocent, rendered him unworthy of an answer. Then saith Pilate — Marvelling at his silence, and being displeased with it; Speakest thou not unto me? — Dost thou make me no reply, and not so much as speak to me in such a circumstance as this, in which thy life is so evidently concerned? Knowest thou not that I have power to crucify thee — To adjudge thee to that terrible death; and have power to release thee — If I please, notwithstanding all the clamourous demands of thine enemies? Jesus answered — With great calmness and mildness; Thou couldest have no power at all against me — For I have done nothing to expose myself to the power of any magistrate; except it were given thee — In an extraordinary way; from above — From the God of heaven, whose providence I acknowledge in all these events. Some have thought that the word anwqen, from above, refers to the situation of the temple, which stood much higher than the pretorium: and that it is as if Jesus had said, I know that whatever thou dost against me, is only in consequence of the sentence passed in yonder court held above, so that their guilt is greater than thine. But though this would very well account for the connection of the latter part of this verse, “I cannot think,” says Dr. Doddridge, “it altogether just; for had Providence permitted Pilate to seize Christ as one dangerous to Cesar’s dignity, he would have had as much power of putting him to death as he now had. It is therefore much more reasonable to suppose it refers to the permission of God’s providence.” Therefore he that delivered me unto thee — Namely, the Jewish high-priest, with his council, having far greater opportunities of being acquainted with God and his law than thou hast, and knowing, also, that I have done nothing amiss; hath the greater sin — Is more blameable than thou art. And from thenceforth Pilate sought to release him — That is, he was still further satisfied of the injustice of the prosecution, and of the innocence of Jesus, so that he endeavoured even more than before to have him released. For the reader will observe, that this was not the first attempt of Pilate to release Jesus. This evangelist himself tells us, (John 18:39,) that he had once before offered to release him. And the answer of the priests on this occasion corresponds thereto. They cried out, saying, If thou let this man go, thou art not Cesar’s friend — That is, thou art not faithful to the emperor; by which they insinuated that they would accuse him to his master, if he did not do his duty. This argument was weighty, and shook Pilate’s resolution to the foundation. He was frightened at the very thought of being accused to Tiberius, who in matters of government, as Tacitus and Suetonius testify, was apt to suspect the worst, and always punished the least crimes relative thereto with death. Whosoever maketh himself a king — Or rather, maketh, or calleth himself king, speaketh against Cesar. So Dr. Campbell reads the clause, observing, “the sentence is true, when basilea [the word here used] is rendered king, but not when rendered a king. Judea, at that time, together with Syria, to which it was annexed, made a province of the empire. Nothing is more certain than that whoever in Judea called himself king, in the sense wherein the word was commonly understood, opposed Cesar. But it did not therefore hold, that whosoever called himself a king, opposed Cesar. For if the kingdom to which he laid claim was without the bounds of the Roman empire, the title in nowise interfered with the rights of the emperor.”

Ver. 7-9. By our law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God. These words gave Pilate divine alarm. To a Roman they might be ambiguous, as the poets caused many of the more illustrious to be descended from Jove, or as our forefathers, from Odin. Pilate asked, whence art thou? What is thy descent; who are thy ancestors? To this enquiry Jesus gave no reply. To the apostles, after supper, he had made a full disclosure of his personal dignity and glory; but to Pilate he refused to be known. Otherwise, how had the scriptures been fulfilled?

8. The more afraid—That is, this expression so increased the awe of his former impression as to induce the following action, that he takes Jesus into the judgment hall for examination on this specific point.

V. 9. Whence art thou?-That is, whose son art thou?

Verse 9. Whence art thou?] This certainly does not mean, From what country art thou? for Pilate knew this well enough; but it appears he made this inquiry to know who were the parents of Christ; what were his pretensions, and whether he really were a demigod, such as the heathens believed in. To this question ve find our Lord gave no answer. He had already told him that his kingdom was not of this world; and that he came to erect a spiritual kingdom, not a temporal one: John 18:36, 37. This answer he deemed sufficient; and he did not choose to satisfy a criminal curiosity, nor to enter then into any debate concerning the absurdity of the heathen worship.

Verses 8-12. When Pilate heard that saying, he was the more afraid — He before feared to shed innocent blood, and now he became more afraid than ever to take his life; suspecting, probably, that the account which he heard of him might be true, and that he might be a divine person. For doubtless he had heard of some of the many miracles which Jesus had performed, and now, it seems, began to think that perhaps what had been currently reported was true, and that he really had performed the wonderful works ascribed to him. For it is very well known, that the religion which the governor professed directed him to acknowledge the existence of demi-gods and heroes, or men descended from the gods. Nay, the heathen believed that their gods themselves sometimes appeared on earth, in the form of men, Acts 14:11, 12. Pilate, therefore, went again into the judgment-hall — Being resolved to act cautiously; and saith unto Jesus, Whence art thou? — That is, From whom art thou descended? or what is this divine original which thou art charged with claiming? But Jesus — Knowing that his innocence was already apparent, even to the conviction of Pilate’s conscience; gave him no answer — To that question. Indeed, Pilate’s ordering, or allowing such cruelties to be inflicted on a person he knew to be innocent, rendered him unworthy of an answer. Then saith Pilate — Marvelling at his silence, and being displeased with it; Speakest thou not unto me? — Dost thou make me no reply, and not so much as speak to me in such a circumstance as this, in which thy life is so evidently concerned? Knowest thou not that I have power to crucify thee — To adjudge thee to that terrible death; and have power to release thee — If I please, notwithstanding all the clamourous demands of thine enemies? Jesus answered — With great calmness and mildness; Thou couldest have no power at all against me — For I have done nothing to expose myself to the power of any magistrate; except it were given thee — In an extraordinary way; from above — From the God of heaven, whose providence I acknowledge in all these events. Some have thought that the word anwqen, from above, refers to the situation of the temple, which stood much higher than the pretorium: and that it is as if Jesus had said, I know that whatever thou dost against me, is only in consequence of the sentence passed in yonder court held above, so that their guilt is greater than thine. But though this would very well account for the connection of the latter part of this verse, “I cannot think,” says Dr. Doddridge, “it altogether just; for had Providence permitted Pilate to seize Christ as one dangerous to Cesar’s dignity, he would have had as much power of putting him to death as he now had. It is therefore much more reasonable to suppose it refers to the permission of God’s providence.” Therefore he that delivered me unto thee — Namely, the Jewish high-priest, with his council, having far greater opportunities of being acquainted with God and his law than thou hast, and knowing, also, that I have done nothing amiss; hath the greater sin — Is more blameable than thou art. And from thenceforth Pilate sought to release him — That is, he was still further satisfied of the injustice of the prosecution, and of the innocence of Jesus, so that he endeavoured even more than before to have him released. For the reader will observe, that this was not the first attempt of Pilate to release Jesus. This evangelist himself tells us, (John 18:39,) that he had once before offered to release him. And the answer of the priests on this occasion corresponds thereto. They cried out, saying, If thou let this man go, thou art not Cesar’s friend — That is, thou art not faithful to the emperor; by which they insinuated that they would accuse him to his master, if he did not do his duty. This argument was weighty, and shook Pilate’s resolution to the foundation. He was frightened at the very thought of being accused to Tiberius, who in matters of government, as Tacitus and Suetonius testify, was apt to suspect the worst, and always punished the least crimes relative thereto with death. Whosoever maketh himself a king — Or rather, maketh, or calleth himself king, speaketh against Cesar. So Dr. Campbell reads the clause, observing, “the sentence is true, when basilea [the word here used] is rendered king, but not when rendered a king. Judea, at that time, together with Syria, to which it was annexed, made a province of the empire. Nothing is more certain than that whoever in Judea called himself king, in the sense wherein the word was commonly understood, opposed Cesar. But it did not therefore hold, that whosoever called himself a king, opposed Cesar. For if the kingdom to which he laid claim was without the bounds of the Roman empire, the title in nowise interfered with the rights of the emperor.”

Ver. 7-9. By our law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God. These words gave Pilate divine alarm. To a Roman they might be ambiguous, as the poets caused many of the more illustrious to be descended from Jove, or as our forefathers, from Odin. Pilate asked, whence art thou? What is thy descent; who are thy ancestors? To this enquiry Jesus gave no reply. To the apostles, after supper, he had made a full disclosure of his personal dignity and glory; but to Pilate he refused to be known. Otherwise, how had the scriptures been fulfilled?

9. Whence art thou?—A most significant question. The sceptical and inquiring world has been asking it ever since. O most supernatural man, reveal thy origin! “Who shall declare his generation?” Isaiah 53:8. No answer—Alas! to none but the true inquirer comes there any response but absolute silence. No explanation proper for Jesus to give could the mind of Pilate have properly received. Wounded pride now mingles with his fear. He will test this superhuman personage with a threat.

Verses 8-12. When Pilate heard that saying, he was the more afraid — He before feared to shed innocent blood, and now he became more afraid than ever to take his life; suspecting, probably, that the account which he heard of him might be true, and that he might be a divine person. For doubtless he had heard of some of the many miracles which Jesus had performed, and now, it seems, began to think that perhaps what had been currently reported was true, and that he really had performed the wonderful works ascribed to him. For it is very well known, that the religion which the governor professed directed him to acknowledge the existence of demi-gods and heroes, or men descended from the gods. Nay, the heathen believed that their gods themselves sometimes appeared on earth, in the form of men, Acts 14:11, 12. Pilate, therefore, went again into the judgment-hall — Being resolved to act cautiously; and saith unto Jesus, Whence art thou? — That is, From whom art thou descended? or what is this divine original which thou art charged with claiming? But Jesus — Knowing that his innocence was already apparent, even to the conviction of Pilate’s conscience; gave him no answer — To that question. Indeed, Pilate’s ordering, or allowing such cruelties to be inflicted on a person he knew to be innocent, rendered him unworthy of an answer. Then saith Pilate — Marvelling at his silence, and being displeased with it; Speakest thou not unto me? — Dost thou make me no reply, and not so much as speak to me in such a circumstance as this, in which thy life is so evidently concerned? Knowest thou not that I have power to crucify thee — To adjudge thee to that terrible death; and have power to release thee — If I please, notwithstanding all the clamourous demands of thine enemies? Jesus answered — With great calmness and mildness; Thou couldest have no power at all against me — For I have done nothing to expose myself to the power of any magistrate; except it were given thee — In an extraordinary way; from above — From the God of heaven, whose providence I acknowledge in all these events. Some have thought that the word anwqen, from above, refers to the situation of the temple, which stood much higher than the pretorium: and that it is as if Jesus had said, I know that whatever thou dost against me, is only in consequence of the sentence passed in yonder court held above, so that their guilt is greater than thine. But though this would very well account for the connection of the latter part of this verse, “I cannot think,” says Dr. Doddridge, “it altogether just; for had Providence permitted Pilate to seize Christ as one dangerous to Cesar’s dignity, he would have had as much power of putting him to death as he now had. It is therefore much more reasonable to suppose it refers to the permission of God’s providence.” Therefore he that delivered me unto thee — Namely, the Jewish high-priest, with his council, having far greater opportunities of being acquainted with God and his law than thou hast, and knowing, also, that I have done nothing amiss; hath the greater sin — Is more blameable than thou art. And from thenceforth Pilate sought to release him — That is, he was still further satisfied of the injustice of the prosecution, and of the innocence of Jesus, so that he endeavoured even more than before to have him released. For the reader will observe, that this was not the first attempt of Pilate to release Jesus. This evangelist himself tells us, (John 18:39,) that he had once before offered to release him. And the answer of the priests on this occasion corresponds thereto. They cried out, saying, If thou let this man go, thou art not Cesar’s friend — That is, thou art not faithful to the emperor; by which they insinuated that they would accuse him to his master, if he did not do his duty. This argument was weighty, and shook Pilate’s resolution to the foundation. He was frightened at the very thought of being accused to Tiberius, who in matters of government, as Tacitus and Suetonius testify, was apt to suspect the worst, and always punished the least crimes relative thereto with death. Whosoever maketh himself a king — Or rather, maketh, or calleth himself king, speaketh against Cesar. So Dr. Campbell reads the clause, observing, “the sentence is true, when basilea [the word here used] is rendered king, but not when rendered a king. Judea, at that time, together with Syria, to which it was annexed, made a province of the empire. Nothing is more certain than that whoever in Judea called himself king, in the sense wherein the word was commonly understood, opposed Cesar. But it did not therefore hold, that whosoever called himself a king, opposed Cesar. For if the kingdom to which he laid claim was without the bounds of the Roman empire, the title in nowise interfered with the rights of the emperor.”

10. Power to crucify… power to release—Roman power may dare if not defy even the supernatural and divine. There is something supreme in her Jupiter Stator, a proud might in her imperial genius, that may venture to threaten even the supernaturals in other parts of the earth.

V. 11. Thou couldst have no power over me-For I have done nothing to expose me to the power of any magistrate.

Therefore he that delivered me to thee, namely, Caiaphas, knowing this, is more blamable than thou.

Verse 11. Hath the greater sin.] It is a sin in thee to condemn me, while thou art convinced in thy conscience that I am innocent: but the Jews who delivered me to thee, and Judas who delivered me to the Jews, have the greater crime to answer for. Thy ignorance in some measure excuses thee; but the rage and malice of the Jews put them at present out of the reach of mercy.

Verses 8-12. When Pilate heard that saying, he was the more afraid — He before feared to shed innocent blood, and now he became more afraid than ever to take his life; suspecting, probably, that the account which he heard of him might be true, and that he might be a divine person. For doubtless he had heard of some of the many miracles which Jesus had performed, and now, it seems, began to think that perhaps what had been currently reported was true, and that he really had performed the wonderful works ascribed to him. For it is very well known, that the religion which the governor professed directed him to acknowledge the existence of demi-gods and heroes, or men descended from the gods. Nay, the heathen believed that their gods themselves sometimes appeared on earth, in the form of men, Acts 14:11, 12. Pilate, therefore, went again into the judgment-hall — Being resolved to act cautiously; and saith unto Jesus, Whence art thou? — That is, From whom art thou descended? or what is this divine original which thou art charged with claiming? But Jesus — Knowing that his innocence was already apparent, even to the conviction of Pilate’s conscience; gave him no answer — To that question. Indeed, Pilate’s ordering, or allowing such cruelties to be inflicted on a person he knew to be innocent, rendered him unworthy of an answer. Then saith Pilate — Marvelling at his silence, and being displeased with it; Speakest thou not unto me? — Dost thou make me no reply, and not so much as speak to me in such a circumstance as this, in which thy life is so evidently concerned? Knowest thou not that I have power to crucify thee — To adjudge thee to that terrible death; and have power to release thee — If I please, notwithstanding all the clamourous demands of thine enemies? Jesus answered — With great calmness and mildness; Thou couldest have no power at all against me — For I have done nothing to expose myself to the power of any magistrate; except it were given thee — In an extraordinary way; from above — From the God of heaven, whose providence I acknowledge in all these events. Some have thought that the word anwqen, from above, refers to the situation of the temple, which stood much higher than the pretorium: and that it is as if Jesus had said, I know that whatever thou dost against me, is only in consequence of the sentence passed in yonder court held above, so that their guilt is greater than thine. But though this would very well account for the connection of the latter part of this verse, “I cannot think,” says Dr. Doddridge, “it altogether just; for had Providence permitted Pilate to seize Christ as one dangerous to Cesar’s dignity, he would have had as much power of putting him to death as he now had. It is therefore much more reasonable to suppose it refers to the permission of God’s providence.” Therefore he that delivered me unto thee — Namely, the Jewish high-priest, with his council, having far greater opportunities of being acquainted with God and his law than thou hast, and knowing, also, that I have done nothing amiss; hath the greater sin — Is more blameable than thou art. And from thenceforth Pilate sought to release him — That is, he was still further satisfied of the injustice of the prosecution, and of the innocence of Jesus, so that he endeavoured even more than before to have him released. For the reader will observe, that this was not the first attempt of Pilate to release Jesus. This evangelist himself tells us, (John 18:39,) that he had once before offered to release him. And the answer of the priests on this occasion corresponds thereto. They cried out, saying, If thou let this man go, thou art not Cesar’s friend — That is, thou art not faithful to the emperor; by which they insinuated that they would accuse him to his master, if he did not do his duty. This argument was weighty, and shook Pilate’s resolution to the foundation. He was frightened at the very thought of being accused to Tiberius, who in matters of government, as Tacitus and Suetonius testify, was apt to suspect the worst, and always punished the least crimes relative thereto with death. Whosoever maketh himself a king — Or rather, maketh, or calleth himself king, speaketh against Cesar. So Dr. Campbell reads the clause, observing, “the sentence is true, when basilea [the word here used] is rendered king, but not when rendered a king. Judea, at that time, together with Syria, to which it was annexed, made a province of the empire. Nothing is more certain than that whoever in Judea called himself king, in the sense wherein the word was commonly understood, opposed Cesar. But it did not therefore hold, that whosoever called himself a king, opposed Cesar. For if the kingdom to which he laid claim was without the bounds of the Roman empire, the title in nowise interfered with the rights of the emperor.”

11. No power at all—But here is a majesty above the majesty of Rome. The prisoner of Pilate is truly greater than Pilate himself. Again he asserts, what he asserted at his arrest, (Matthew 26:53,) that his surrender was perfectly voluntary, that the Scripture might be fulfilled. Only because it was accepted as a foreknown fact in the divine plan, and predicted in Scripture, does Jesus consent to Pilate’s power. Pilate would have no power but that it was given from above. Therefore—Because I am that Divine Being above all human power. He that delivered me unto thee— The word delivered is the same in Greek as the usual word for betrayed. The reference therefore is, primarily, to Judas; for we have already noted that the words just used are parallel with his words used at his arrest. Greater sin—The more divine the victim, the greater the sin of his betrayal and delivery.

Verse 12. Pilate sought to release him] Pilate made five several attempts to release our Lord; as we may learn from Luke 23:4, 15, 20, 22; John 19:4, 12, 13.

Thou art not Cæsar’s friend] Thou dost not act like a person who has the interest of the emperor at heart. Ambassadors, prefects, counsellors, &c., were generally termed the friends of the emperor. This insinuation determined Pilate to make no longer resistance: he was afraid of being accused, and he knew Tiberius was one of the most jealous and distrustful princes in the world. During his reign, accusations of conspiracies were much in fashion; they were founded on the silliest pretenses, and punished with excessive rigour. See Calmet, Tacit. An. l. i. c. 72, 73, 74. Sueton. in Tiber. c. 58.

Verses 8-12. When Pilate heard that saying, he was the more afraid — He before feared to shed innocent blood, and now he became more afraid than ever to take his life; suspecting, probably, that the account which he heard of him might be true, and that he might be a divine person. For doubtless he had heard of some of the many miracles which Jesus had performed, and now, it seems, began to think that perhaps what had been currently reported was true, and that he really had performed the wonderful works ascribed to him. For it is very well known, that the religion which the governor professed directed him to acknowledge the existence of demi-gods and heroes, or men descended from the gods. Nay, the heathen believed that their gods themselves sometimes appeared on earth, in the form of men, Acts 14:11, 12. Pilate, therefore, went again into the judgment-hall — Being resolved to act cautiously; and saith unto Jesus, Whence art thou? — That is, From whom art thou descended? or what is this divine original which thou art charged with claiming? But Jesus — Knowing that his innocence was already apparent, even to the conviction of Pilate’s conscience; gave him no answer — To that question. Indeed, Pilate’s ordering, or allowing such cruelties to be inflicted on a person he knew to be innocent, rendered him unworthy of an answer. Then saith Pilate — Marvelling at his silence, and being displeased with it; Speakest thou not unto me? — Dost thou make me no reply, and not so much as speak to me in such a circumstance as this, in which thy life is so evidently concerned? Knowest thou not that I have power to crucify thee — To adjudge thee to that terrible death; and have power to release thee — If I please, notwithstanding all the clamourous demands of thine enemies? Jesus answered — With great calmness and mildness; Thou couldest have no power at all against me — For I have done nothing to expose myself to the power of any magistrate; except it were given thee — In an extraordinary way; from above — From the God of heaven, whose providence I acknowledge in all these events. Some have thought that the word anwqen, from above, refers to the situation of the temple, which stood much higher than the pretorium: and that it is as if Jesus had said, I know that whatever thou dost against me, is only in consequence of the sentence passed in yonder court held above, so that their guilt is greater than thine. But though this would very well account for the connection of the latter part of this verse, “I cannot think,” says Dr. Doddridge, “it altogether just; for had Providence permitted Pilate to seize Christ as one dangerous to Cesar’s dignity, he would have had as much power of putting him to death as he now had. It is therefore much more reasonable to suppose it refers to the permission of God’s providence.” Therefore he that delivered me unto thee — Namely, the Jewish high-priest, with his council, having far greater opportunities of being acquainted with God and his law than thou hast, and knowing, also, that I have done nothing amiss; hath the greater sin — Is more blameable than thou art. And from thenceforth Pilate sought to release him — That is, he was still further satisfied of the injustice of the prosecution, and of the innocence of Jesus, so that he endeavoured even more than before to have him released. For the reader will observe, that this was not the first attempt of Pilate to release Jesus. This evangelist himself tells us, (John 18:39,) that he had once before offered to release him. And the answer of the priests on this occasion corresponds thereto. They cried out, saying, If thou let this man go, thou art not Cesar’s friend — That is, thou art not faithful to the emperor; by which they insinuated that they would accuse him to his master, if he did not do his duty. This argument was weighty, and shook Pilate’s resolution to the foundation. He was frightened at the very thought of being accused to Tiberius, who in matters of government, as Tacitus and Suetonius testify, was apt to suspect the worst, and always punished the least crimes relative thereto with death. Whosoever maketh himself a king — Or rather, maketh, or calleth himself king, speaketh against Cesar. So Dr. Campbell reads the clause, observing, “the sentence is true, when basilea [the word here used] is rendered king, but not when rendered a king. Judea, at that time, together with Syria, to which it was annexed, made a province of the empire. Nothing is more certain than that whoever in Judea called himself king, in the sense wherein the word was commonly understood, opposed Cesar. But it did not therefore hold, that whosoever called himself a king, opposed Cesar. For if the kingdom to which he laid claim was without the bounds of the Roman empire, the title in nowise interfered with the rights of the emperor.”

12. From thenceforth—Rather from that reason. That is, because he felt the impress of Jesus’s supernatural character. Nothing now, apparently, would have prevented Pilate from releasing Jesus by a peremptory exertion of power; but the Jews, with surprising art, had reserved their master-stroke for this final period. Spare this man and you are yourself an undone man. Not Cesar’s friend—The present Cesar, or Emperor of Rome, was the jealous, capricious, cruel Tiberius. Let him for a moment be made to suspect that a viceroy of his tolerates even the shadow of a rebel king, and that viceroy is a dead man. As we have elsewhere noted, Pilate in fact, three years after, committed suicide to escape punishment under charge of maladministration.

V. 13. Pilate sat down on the judgment seat-Which was then without the palace,

in a place called, in Greek, the pavement, on account of a beautiful piece of Mosaic work, with which the floor was adorned:

but in Hebrew, Gabbatha-Or the high place, because it stood on an eminence, so that the judge sitting on his throne might be seen and heard by a considerable number of people.

Verse 13. The Pavement] liqostrwton, literally, a stone pavement: probably it was that place in the open court where the chair of justice was set, for the prefects of provinces always held their courts of justice in the open air, and which was paved with stones of various colours, like that of Ahasuerus, Esther 1:6, of red, blue, white, and black marble; what we still term Mosaic work, or something in imitation of it; such as the Roman pavements frequently dug up in this and other countries, where the Romans have had military stations.

Gabbatha.] That is, an elevated place; from hbg gabah, high, raised up; and it is very likely that the judgment seat was considerably elevated in the court, and that the governor went up to it by steps; and perhaps these very steps were what was called the Pavement. John does not say that Lithostroton, or the Pavement, is the meaning of the word Gabbatha; but that the place was called so in the Hebrew. The place was probably called Lithostroton, or the Pavement: the seat of judgment, Gabbatha, the raised or elevated place.

In several MSS. and versions, the scribes not understanding the Hebrew word, wrote it variously, Gabbatha, Gabatha, Kapphatha, Kappata, Gennetha, Gennæsa, and Gennesar. Lightfoot conjectures that the pavement here means the room Gazith in the temple, in which the grand council, called the Sanhedrin, held their meetings.

Verses 13-15. When Pilate heard that saying, he brought Jesus forth — Brought him out of the palace a second time; and sat down in the judgment-seat — On the tribunal which was then erected without the palace; in a place that was called, in Greek, liqostrwton, the Pavement — So called on account of a beautiful piece of Mosaic work, with which the floor was adorned; but in the Hebrew, Gabbatha — Or, the high place, because it stood on an eminence; so that the judge, being seated there, might be heard and seen by a considerable number of people. And it was the preparation of the passover — Or, of the paschal sabbath. The word paraskeuh, [here rendered preparation,] in the New Testament, denotes always, in my opinion, says Dr. Campbell, “the day before the sabbath, and not the day which preceded any other festival, unless that festival fell on the sabbath. My reasons for this opinion are, 1st, This explanation coincides exactly with the definition which Mark gives of that word, (Mark 15:42,) It was the preparation, that is, the eve of the sabbath. 2d, The word occurs six times in the New Testament, and, in all these places, confessedly means the sixth day of the week, answering to our Friday, and consequently the day before the Jewish sabbath, or Saturday. 3d, The preparation of all things necessary the day before the sabbath was expressly commanded in the law, Exodus 16:5, 23. There was nothing analogous to this enjoined in preparation for the other feasts.” And about the sixth hour — Or rather, the third hour: for as there is no reason to think that John computed time in a manner different from that used by the other evangelists; “as six o’clock, (according to the Roman computation,) or soon after sunrise, must have been much too early for all the events to have occurred that morning which preceded our Lord’s crucifixion; as Mark has expressly mentioned the third hour, or nine o’clock, for the time of that event, to which the accounts of the other evangelists accord; and as the sixth hour, or noon, (according to the Jewish computation,) would be too late to agree with the parallel scriptures; so it seems the most easy way of solving the difficulty, to suppose that [z] sixth, instead of [g] third, was inserted by some of the early transcribers of this gospel. The mistake would be very easily fallen into; and in a few places it is necessary to allow that something of this kind has happened. Indeed some manuscripts read the third hour.” — Scott. See this point more fully explained and defended in the note on Mark 15:25. And he saith unto the Jews — Who were present in vast numbers; Behold your king — Pointing to Jesus as he now appeared in the mock pomp of royalty, wearing the purple robe and crown of thorns, and with his hands manacled. It seems he spoke thus, either in ridicule of the national expectation, or, which is more probable, to show the Jews how vain the fears were which they pretended to entertain about the emperor’s authority in Judea, the person who was the occasion of them, showing, in the whole of his deportment, a temper of mind no ways consonant to the ambition which they branded him with. But they cried out — With indignation and disdain; Away with him, &c. — See on Luke 23:18-25. Pilate saith, shall I crucify your king? — According to most commentators, Pilate said this, mocking him. But it is more agreeable to his general behaviour in this affair to suppose, that he spoke it with a view to move the populace, who he knew had once held Jesus in great esteem as the Messiah. For John tells us (verse 12,) that he now sought to release him. The chief priests answered, We have no king but Cesar — “In this reply they publicly renounced their hope of a Messiah, which the whole economy of their religion had been calculated to cherish: and likewise they acknowledged publicly their subjection to the Romans; and by so doing condemned themselves when they afterward rebelled.”

13. Heard that saying—Jesus, again, must die that another may not die. A just man though he is, Pilate will shed his blood for his own safety. The Jew conquers the Roman; the subject rules the ruler. The Gentile is compelled by the Jew to be the executioner of the Saviour of mankind. He brought Jesus forth—Though the examination might be in part in private, yet the sentence must be pronounced in public. Jesus, therefore, is led into the fore court, and Pilate takes his place upon the judgment seat. Called the Pavement—This was a platform of Mosaic, ornamented and tessellated, on which the judgment throne was made to stand. Gabbatha—Signifies an elevation. John gives the Hebrew as well as the Greek name of the platform, to indicate that Pilate pronounced judgment solemnly, not from a level, but from the high judicial seat. So truly official a matter was this pavement that we are told by Seutonius, in his life of Cesar, that that general, wherever he marched, had the fitted marble conveyed with him, in order to lay the platform, whenever he encamped, at his pretorium or headquarters.

V. 14. It was the preparation of the passover-For this reason both the Jews and Pilate were desirous to bring the matter to a conclusion. Every Friday was called the preparation, (namely, for the Sabbath.) And as often as the passover fell on a Friday, that day was called the preparation of the passover.

Verse 14. It was the preparation of the Passover] That is, the time in which they were just preparing to kill the paschal lamb. Critics differ widely concerning the time of our Lord’s crucifixion; and this verse is variously understood. Some think it signifies merely the preparation of the Sabbath; and that it is called the preparation of the passover, because the preparation of the Sabbath happened that year on the eve of the Passover. Others think that the preparation of the Sabbath is distinctly spoken of in John 19:31, and was different from what is here mentioned. Contending nations may be more easily reconciled than contending critics. The sixth hour] Mark says, Mark 15:25, that it was the third hour. trith, the third, is the reading of DL, four others, the Chron. Alex., Seuerus Antiochen., Ammonius, with others mentioned by Theophylact. Nonnus, who wrote in the fifth century, reads trith, the third. As in ancient times all the numbers were written in the manuscripts not at large but in numeral letters, it was easy for G three, to be mistaken for v v six. The

Codex Bezæ has generally numeral letters instead of words. Bengel observes that he has found the letter G gamma, THREE, exceedingly like the v

v episemon, SIX, in some MSS. {Episemon = greek ‘st’ combined, similar appearance to final form sigma with a nearly flat top. Similar appearance to upper case gamma.} The major part of the best critics think that trith, the third, is the genuine reading. See Clarke’s note on “Mark 15:25”. Behold your king!] This was probably intended as an irony; and, by thus turning their pretended serious apprehensions into ridicule, he hoped still to release him.

Verses 13-15. When Pilate heard that saying, he brought Jesus forth — Brought him out of the palace a second time; and sat down in the judgment-seat — On the tribunal which was then erected without the palace; in a place that was called, in Greek, liqostrwton, the Pavement — So called on account of a beautiful piece of Mosaic work, with which the floor was adorned; but in the Hebrew, Gabbatha — Or, the high place, because it stood on an eminence; so that the judge, being seated there, might be heard and seen by a considerable number of people. And it was the preparation of the passover — Or, of the paschal sabbath. The word paraskeuh, [here rendered preparation,] in the New Testament, denotes always, in my opinion, says Dr. Campbell, “the day before the sabbath, and not the day which preceded any other festival, unless that festival fell on the sabbath. My reasons for this opinion are, 1st, This explanation coincides exactly with the definition which Mark gives of that word, (Mark 15:42,) It was the preparation, that is, the eve of the sabbath. 2d, The word occurs six times in the New Testament, and, in all these places, confessedly means the sixth day of the week, answering to our Friday, and consequently the day before the Jewish sabbath, or Saturday. 3d, The preparation of all things necessary the day before the sabbath was expressly commanded in the law, Exodus 16:5, 23. There was nothing analogous to this enjoined in preparation for the other feasts.” And about the sixth hour — Or rather, the third hour: for as there is no reason to think that John computed time in a manner different from that used by the other evangelists; “as six o’clock, (according to the Roman computation,) or soon after sunrise, must have been much too early for all the events to have occurred that morning which preceded our Lord’s crucifixion; as Mark has expressly mentioned the third hour, or nine o’clock, for the time of that event, to which the accounts of the other evangelists accord; and as the sixth hour, or noon, (according to the Jewish computation,) would be too late to agree with the parallel scriptures; so it seems the most easy way of solving the difficulty, to suppose that [z] sixth, instead of [g] third, was inserted by some of the early transcribers of this gospel. The mistake would be very easily fallen into; and in a few places it is necessary to allow that something of this kind has happened. Indeed some manuscripts read the third hour.” — Scott. See this point more fully explained and defended in the note on Mark 15:25. And he saith unto the Jews — Who were present in vast numbers; Behold your king — Pointing to Jesus as he now appeared in the mock pomp of royalty, wearing the purple robe and crown of thorns, and with his hands manacled. It seems he spoke thus, either in ridicule of the national expectation, or, which is more probable, to show the Jews how vain the fears were which they pretended to entertain about the emperor’s authority in Judea, the person who was the occasion of them, showing, in the whole of his deportment, a temper of mind no ways consonant to the ambition which they branded him with. But they cried out — With indignation and disdain; Away with him, &c. — See on Luke 23:18-25. Pilate saith, shall I crucify your king? — According to most commentators, Pilate said this, mocking him. But it is more agreeable to his general behaviour in this affair to suppose, that he spoke it with a view to move the populace, who he knew had once held Jesus in great esteem as the Messiah. For John tells us (verse 12,) that he now sought to release him. The chief priests answered, We have no king but Cesar — “In this reply they publicly renounced their hope of a Messiah, which the whole economy of their religion had been calculated to cherish: and likewise they acknowledged publicly their subjection to the Romans; and by so doing condemned themselves when they afterward rebelled.”

14. It was the preparation—The day before the Jewish (Saturday) Sabbath, that is, Friday, the day of crucifixion. As the Jewish Sabbath commenced on the evening of the preceding Friday, so the latter part of Friday was originally devoted to a preparation for the Sabbath. But, gradually, the time of preparation was extended, and, finally, the whole day became the preparation. Of the passover—That is, it was the Sabbath-preparation in the Passover week. About the sixth hour—That is, toward noon. But Mark, 15:25, says it was the third hour when they crucified him. Attempts have been made to show this to be a contradiction. The third hour would be nine o’clock. But Mark does not say precisely that he was crucified at nine o’clock. He truly says that the preceding events brought it to nine o’clock, and after that they crucified him. The process resulting in his crucifixion commenced about nine o’clock, and John says the crucifixion took place not exactly at twelve, but about that time. Precise measurement of time, brought about by modern science and accurate timepieces, was unknown to antiquity. Behold your King!—One of the sarcastic expressions of the indignant Pilate against the Jews.

Verse 15. Away with him] aron: probably this means, kill him. In Isaiah 57:1, it is said, kai andrev, dikaioi airontai, and just men are taken away; that is, according to some, by a violent death.

Verses 13-15. When Pilate heard that saying, he brought Jesus forth — Brought him out of the palace a second time; and sat down in the judgment-seat — On the tribunal which was then erected without the palace; in a place that was called, in Greek, liqostrwton, the Pavement — So called on account of a beautiful piece of Mosaic work, with which the floor was adorned; but in the Hebrew, Gabbatha — Or, the high place, because it stood on an eminence; so that the judge, being seated there, might be heard and seen by a considerable number of people. And it was the preparation of the passover — Or, of the paschal sabbath. The word paraskeuh, [here rendered preparation,] in the New Testament, denotes always, in my opinion, says Dr. Campbell, “the day before the sabbath, and not the day which preceded any other festival, unless that festival fell on the sabbath. My reasons for this opinion are, 1st, This explanation coincides exactly with the definition which Mark gives of that word, (Mark 15:42,) It was the preparation, that is, the eve of the sabbath. 2d, The word occurs six times in the New Testament, and, in all these places, confessedly means the sixth day of the week, answering to our Friday, and consequently the day before the Jewish sabbath, or Saturday. 3d, The preparation of all things necessary the day before the sabbath was expressly commanded in the law, Exodus 16:5, 23. There was nothing analogous to this enjoined in preparation for the other feasts.” And about the sixth hour — Or rather, the third hour: for as there is no reason to think that John computed time in a manner different from that used by the other evangelists; “as six o’clock, (according to the Roman computation,) or soon after sunrise, must have been much too early for all the events to have occurred that morning which preceded our Lord’s crucifixion; as Mark has expressly mentioned the third hour, or nine o’clock, for the time of that event, to which the accounts of the other evangelists accord; and as the sixth hour, or noon, (according to the Jewish computation,) would be too late to agree with the parallel scriptures; so it seems the most easy way of solving the difficulty, to suppose that [z] sixth, instead of [g] third, was inserted by some of the early transcribers of this gospel. The mistake would be very easily fallen into; and in a few places it is necessary to allow that something of this kind has happened. Indeed some manuscripts read the third hour.” — Scott. See this point more fully explained and defended in the note on Mark 15:25. And he saith unto the Jews — Who were present in vast numbers; Behold your king — Pointing to Jesus as he now appeared in the mock pomp of royalty, wearing the purple robe and crown of thorns, and with his hands manacled. It seems he spoke thus, either in ridicule of the national expectation, or, which is more probable, to show the Jews how vain the fears were which they pretended to entertain about the emperor’s authority in Judea, the person who was the occasion of them, showing, in the whole of his deportment, a temper of mind no ways consonant to the ambition which they branded him with. But they cried out — With indignation and disdain; Away with him, &c. — See on Luke 23:18-25. Pilate saith, shall I crucify your king? — According to most commentators, Pilate said this, mocking him. But it is more agreeable to his general behaviour in this affair to suppose, that he spoke it with a view to move the populace, who he knew had once held Jesus in great esteem as the Messiah. For John tells us (verse 12,) that he now sought to release him. The chief priests answered, We have no king but Cesar — “In this reply they publicly renounced their hope of a Messiah, which the whole economy of their religion had been calculated to cherish: and likewise they acknowledged publicly their subjection to the Romans; and by so doing condemned themselves when they afterward rebelled.”

15. We have no king but Cesar—Thus, to repudiate the Messiahship of Jesus, they not only lay firm claim to the domination of the Romans, but reject Jehovah himself as the king of Israel.

§ 140.—LEADING FORTH AND CRUCIFIXION OF JESUS, 17.

Matthew 27:32-34; Mark 15:21-23; Luke 23:26-33. See notes on the parallel sections.

§ 141.—JESUS ON THE CROSS, 18-30.

Matthew 27:35-50; Mark 15:24-37; Luke 23:33-46. See notes on parallel sections.

Verse 16. Then delivered he him] This was not till after he had washed his hands, Matthew 27:24, to show, by that symbolical action, that he was innocent of the death of Christ. John omits this circumstance, together with the insults which Christ received from the soldiers. See Matthew 27:26, &c.; Mark 15:16, &c.

Verses 16-18. Then delivered he him — Having now laid aside all thoughts of saving Jesus, Pilate gave him up to the will of his enemies, and commanded the soldiers to prepare for his execution. And they took Jesus, and led him away — After they had insulted and abused him, as is related Matthew 27:27-31; Mark 15:16-20, where see the notes. And he, bearing his cross — Not the whole cross, (for that was too large and heavy,) but the transverse beam of it, to which his hands were afterward fastened. This part they used to make the person carry who was to be executed. Went forth — Out of the city, to a place which it seems lay on the western side of Jerusalem, but a little without the boundaries of it; unto a place called a place of the scull — The place of execution had this name given it from the criminals’ bones which lay scattered there. See note on Matthew 27:33. Golgotha is a Syriac word, and signifies a scull, or head. Here some of Christ’s friends offered him a stupifying potion, with a view, probably, to render him insensible of the ignominy and pain of his punishment. See note on Matthew 27:33, 34. And two other with him, on either side one — See note on Luke 23:32, 33.

DELIVERS HIM FOR CRUCIFIXION, 1-16.

Matthew 27:24-31; Mark 15:15-20; Luke 23:23-25.

1. Scourged him—The punishment of personal scourging with whips, rods, or cords, disused by modern civilization, is of high antiquity. The monuments show that it was a custom in ancient Egypt. It was legalized by Moses, but humanely limited to forty lashes, which the modern Jews, to avoid even an accidental overstepping of the law, limited to thirty-nine. Though not among the Jews a disgraceful punishment, it was held by the Roman law unworthy to be inflicted on a Roman citizen. The victim was bound to a low pillar, in order that, stooping forward, he might curve his bare back to receive the full fair stroke. It was customarily inflicted before crucifixion, and no limit was fixed by Roman law to the number of the blows. It has been questioned whether Pilate intended this to be the scourging preceding crucifixion, or whether it was intended as a sole punishment; whether as a compromise, according to Luke xxiii, 16, or whether he hoped, by presenting Jesus under the cruel effects of the scourge before their eyes, he might melt them to pity. But it appears by Luke xxiii, 25 that, at the close of the affair by their choice of Barabbas, he delivered Jesus to their will; so that this is probably the scourging preparatory to crucifixion. The presenting Jesus therefore so scourged, to induce their pity, was doubtless an afterthought.

V. 17. Bearing his cross-Not the whole cross, (for that was too large and heavy,) but the transverse beam of it, to which his hands were afterward fastened. This they used to make the person to be executed carry. Matthew 27:31; Mark 15:20; Luke 23:26.

Verse 17. Bearing his cross] He bore it all alone first; when he could no longer carry the whole through weakness, occasioned by the ill usage he had received, Simon, a Cyrenian, helped him to carry it: see Clarke’s note on “Matthew 27:32”.

Golgotha] See Clarke on “Matthew 27:33”.

Verses 16-18. Then delivered he him — Having now laid aside all thoughts of saving Jesus, Pilate gave him up to the will of his enemies, and commanded the soldiers to prepare for his execution. And they took Jesus, and led him away — After they had insulted and abused him, as is related Matthew 27:27-31; Mark 15:16-20, where see the notes. And he, bearing his cross — Not the whole cross, (for that was too large and heavy,) but the transverse beam of it, to which his hands were afterward fastened. This part they used to make the person carry who was to be executed. Went forth — Out of the city, to a place which it seems lay on the western side of Jerusalem, but a little without the boundaries of it; unto a place called a place of the scull — The place of execution had this name given it from the criminals’ bones which lay scattered there. See note on Matthew 27:33. Golgotha is a Syriac word, and signifies a scull, or head. Here some of Christ’s friends offered him a stupifying potion, with a view, probably, to render him insensible of the ignominy and pain of his punishment. See note on Matthew 27:33, 34. And two other with him, on either side one — See note on Luke 23:32, 33.

Verse 18. Two other] Matthew and Mark in the parallel places calls them robbers or murderers; they probably belonged to the gang of Barabbas. See about the figure of the cross, and the nature of crucifixion, on Matthew 27:35.

Verses 16-18. Then delivered he him — Having now laid aside all thoughts of saving Jesus, Pilate gave him up to the will of his enemies, and commanded the soldiers to prepare for his execution. And they took Jesus, and led him away — After they had insulted and abused him, as is related Matthew 27:27-31; Mark 15:16-20, where see the notes. And he, bearing his cross — Not the whole cross, (for that was too large and heavy,) but the transverse beam of it, to which his hands were afterward fastened. This part they used to make the person carry who was to be executed. Went forth — Out of the city, to a place which it seems lay on the western side of Jerusalem, but a little without the boundaries of it; unto a place called a place of the scull — The place of execution had this name given it from the criminals’ bones which lay scattered there. See note on Matthew 27:33. Golgotha is a Syriac word, and signifies a scull, or head. Here some of Christ’s friends offered him a stupifying potion, with a view, probably, to render him insensible of the ignominy and pain of his punishment. See note on Matthew 27:33, 34. And two other with him, on either side one — See note on Luke 23:32, 33.

V. 19. Jesus of Nazareth, the king of the Jews-Undoubtedly these were the very words, although the other evangelists do not express them at large.

Verse 19. Pilate wrote a title] See Clarke on “Matthew 27:37”.

Verses 19-22. And Pilate wrote a title, &c. — The governor, as usual, put a title or writing on the cross, signifying the crime for which Jesus was condemned. This writing probably was in black characters on a whitened board. And the writing was, JESUS OF NAZARETH, THE KING OF THE JEWS — Here, as Bengelius has observed, John gives us the very words ordered to be written by Pilate, (and without doubt the same in the three languages,) although the other evangelists do not express them at large. This title then read many of the Jews — Who came up to the feast of the passover; for the place was nigh to the city — Lying but just without the gates; and, that the inscription might be generally understood, it was written in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin — So that it might easily be read by Jews, Romans, and most other foreigners. It was written in Latin, for the majesty of the Roman empire; in Greek, for the information of the Hellenists, who spoke that language, and came in great numbers to the feast; and, in Hebrew, because it was the language of the nation. The inscription set up in the temple, to prohibit strangers from coming within those sacred limits, was written in all these three languages. It is remarkable, that, by the influence of Providence, the cross of Christ bore an inscription in the languages of those nations which were soon to be subdued to the faith of it; for not only the Jewish religion was to give place to it, but likewise the Grecian learning, and the Roman strength. Then said the chief priests, Write not, The King of the Jews, &c. — “When the priests read this title, they were exceedingly displeased; because, as it represented the crime for which Jesus was condemned, it intimated that he had been acknowledged for the Messiah. Besides, being placed over the head of one who was dying by the most infamous punishment, it implied that all who attempted to deliver the Jews should come to the same end. Wherefore, the faith and hope of the nation being thus publicly ridiculed, the priests thought themselves highly affronted, and came to Pilate in great concern, begging that the writing might be altered. But he, having intended the affront, because they had constrained him to crucify Jesus, contrary both to his judgment and inclination, would not hear them, but rejected their application with some warmth, and with that inflexibility which historians represent as part of his character.” — Macknight.

Ver. 19. Pilate wrote a title, and put it on the cross. Notes on this subject will be found on Matthew 27:37. Luke 23:38.

19. Pilate wrote a title—Pilate (doubtless by the hand of a writer) prepared this title, with the careful purpose of another and final sarcasm upon the Jews. It was probably borne upon the person of Jesus while going to execution, and then fastened upon the cross.

V. 20. It was written in Latin-For the majesty of the Roman empire; in Hebrew-Because it was the language of the nation; and in Greek-For the information of the Hellenists, who spoke that language, and came in great numbers to the feast.

Verse 20. Hebrew,-Greek,-Latin.] See Clarke on “Luke 23:38”. On Matthew 27:37, I have given this title in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin, as mentioned by this evangelist. The reader, however, will not be displeased to find the same title repeated here in a character which was written in the fourth century, and is probably nearly resembling that used in the earliest ages of Christianity. The Greek and Latin character, which is inserted here, is an exact fac-simile of that in the Codex Bezæ, cut and cast at the expense of the University of Cambridge, for Dr. Kipling’s edition of that most venerable MS. which contains the Greek text of the four evangelists and Acts; and the Latin text of the same, as it existed before the time of St. Jerome. Having examined the MS. myself, I can say that these types are a very faithful representation of the original. In Hebrew, JEbraisti.

aydwhyd aklm ayrxn [wcy

In Greek, JEllhnisti.

ihsouv o nazwreov o basileuv twn ioudaiwn

In Latin, JRwmaisti.

iehsus nazarenus rex iudæorum

Verses 19-22. And Pilate wrote a title, &c. — The governor, as usual, put a title or writing on the cross, signifying the crime for which Jesus was condemned. This writing probably was in black characters on a whitened board. And the writing was, JESUS OF NAZARETH, THE KING OF THE JEWS — Here, as Bengelius has observed, John gives us the very words ordered to be written by Pilate, (and without doubt the same in the three languages,) although the other evangelists do not express them at large. This title then read many of the Jews — Who came up to the feast of the passover; for the place was nigh to the city — Lying but just without the gates; and, that the inscription might be generally understood, it was written in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin — So that it might easily be read by Jews, Romans, and most other foreigners. It was written in Latin, for the majesty of the Roman empire; in Greek, for the information of the Hellenists, who spoke that language, and came in great numbers to the feast; and, in Hebrew, because it was the language of the nation. The inscription set up in the temple, to prohibit strangers from coming within those sacred limits, was written in all these three languages. It is remarkable, that, by the influence of Providence, the cross of Christ bore an inscription in the languages of those nations which were soon to be subdued to the faith of it; for not only the Jewish religion was to give place to it, but likewise the Grecian learning, and the Roman strength. Then said the chief priests, Write not, The King of the Jews, &c. — “When the priests read this title, they were exceedingly displeased; because, as it represented the crime for which Jesus was condemned, it intimated that he had been acknowledged for the Messiah. Besides, being placed over the head of one who was dying by the most infamous punishment, it implied that all who attempted to deliver the Jews should come to the same end. Wherefore, the faith and hope of the nation being thus publicly ridiculed, the priests thought themselves highly affronted, and came to Pilate in great concern, begging that the writing might be altered. But he, having intended the affront, because they had constrained him to crucify Jesus, contrary both to his judgment and inclination, would not hear them, but rejected their application with some warmth, and with that inflexibility which historians represent as part of his character.” — Macknight.

20. Read many of the Jews—The nearness to the city, mentioned in the next words, and the variety of languages in which it was written, gave a wide notoriety to the inscription. Jerusalem and Judea are told that their king hangs upon the cross. They had threatened to make his unpunished claim of kingship a charge against Pilate before Cesar; Pilate retorts by making that kingship an insult upon them before the world. He can now report to Cesar that he has hung a king for them.

Verses 19-22. And Pilate wrote a title, &c. — The governor, as usual, put a title or writing on the cross, signifying the crime for which Jesus was condemned. This writing probably was in black characters on a whitened board. And the writing was, JESUS OF NAZARETH, THE KING OF THE JEWS — Here, as Bengelius has observed, John gives us the very words ordered to be written by Pilate, (and without doubt the same in the three languages,) although the other evangelists do not express them at large. This title then read many of the Jews — Who came up to the feast of the passover; for the place was nigh to the city — Lying but just without the gates; and, that the inscription might be generally understood, it was written in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin — So that it might easily be read by Jews, Romans, and most other foreigners. It was written in Latin, for the majesty of the Roman empire; in Greek, for the information of the Hellenists, who spoke that language, and came in great numbers to the feast; and, in Hebrew, because it was the language of the nation. The inscription set up in the temple, to prohibit strangers from coming within those sacred limits, was written in all these three languages. It is remarkable, that, by the influence of Providence, the cross of Christ bore an inscription in the languages of those nations which were soon to be subdued to the faith of it; for not only the Jewish religion was to give place to it, but likewise the Grecian learning, and the Roman strength. Then said the chief priests, Write not, The King of the Jews, &c. — “When the priests read this title, they were exceedingly displeased; because, as it represented the crime for which Jesus was condemned, it intimated that he had been acknowledged for the Messiah. Besides, being placed over the head of one who was dying by the most infamous punishment, it implied that all who attempted to deliver the Jews should come to the same end. Wherefore, the faith and hope of the nation being thus publicly ridiculed, the priests thought themselves highly affronted, and came to Pilate in great concern, begging that the writing might be altered. But he, having intended the affront, because they had constrained him to crucify Jesus, contrary both to his judgment and inclination, would not hear them, but rejected their application with some warmth, and with that inflexibility which historians represent as part of his character.” — Macknight.

21. Said the chief priests… Write not—This betrayal of their feeling of the odiousness of the superscription affords Pilate the completeness of his triumph. He said—This would make his crime consist in making a treasonable claim. Pilate would have it, as in truth it was, that Jesus was their king.

V. 22. What I have written, I have written-That shall stand.

Verse 22. What I have written, I have written.] That is, I will not alter what I have written. The Roman laws forbad the sentence to be altered when once pronounced; and as this inscription was considered as the sentence pronounced against our Lord, therefore, it could not be changed: but this form of speech is common in the Jewish writings, and means simply, what is done shall continue. Pilate seems to speak prophetically. This is the king of the Jews: they shall have no other Messiah for ever.

Verses 19-22. And Pilate wrote a title, &c. — The governor, as usual, put a title or writing on the cross, signifying the crime for which Jesus was condemned. This writing probably was in black characters on a whitened board. And the writing was, JESUS OF NAZARETH, THE KING OF THE JEWS — Here, as Bengelius has observed, John gives us the very words ordered to be written by Pilate, (and without doubt the same in the three languages,) although the other evangelists do not express them at large. This title then read many of the Jews — Who came up to the feast of the passover; for the place was nigh to the city — Lying but just without the gates; and, that the inscription might be generally understood, it was written in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin — So that it might easily be read by Jews, Romans, and most other foreigners. It was written in Latin, for the majesty of the Roman empire; in Greek, for the information of the Hellenists, who spoke that language, and came in great numbers to the feast; and, in Hebrew, because it was the language of the nation. The inscription set up in the temple, to prohibit strangers from coming within those sacred limits, was written in all these three languages. It is remarkable, that, by the influence of Providence, the cross of Christ bore an inscription in the languages of those nations which were soon to be subdued to the faith of it; for not only the Jewish religion was to give place to it, but likewise the Grecian learning, and the Roman strength. Then said the chief priests, Write not, The King of the Jews, &c. — “When the priests read this title, they were exceedingly displeased; because, as it represented the crime for which Jesus was condemned, it intimated that he had been acknowledged for the Messiah. Besides, being placed over the head of one who was dying by the most infamous punishment, it implied that all who attempted to deliver the Jews should come to the same end. Wherefore, the faith and hope of the nation being thus publicly ridiculed, the priests thought themselves highly affronted, and came to Pilate in great concern, begging that the writing might be altered. But he, having intended the affront, because they had constrained him to crucify Jesus, contrary both to his judgment and inclination, would not hear them, but rejected their application with some warmth, and with that inflexibility which historians represent as part of his character.” — Macknight.

22. I have written—In the true style of an imperious Roman. He at once displays his arbitrary authority, maintains an immovable record, and attains a complete triumph over these Jews. And in his declaration there is the force of a prophecy. Christ is King, and no earthly power can obliterate the truth of his eternal royalty.

The parting of his garments, and the lot, 23, 24. Compare Matthew 27:35; Mark 15:24; Luke 23:33.

V. 23. The vesture-The upper garment.

Verse 23. To every soldier a part] So it appears there were four soldiers employed in nailing him to and rearing up the cross.

The coat was without seam] Several have seriously doubted whether this can be literally understood, as they imagine that nothing with sleeves, &c. can be woven without a seam. But Baun, de Vest. Sacer. Heb. l. 1, c. 16, has proved, not only that such things were done by the ancients, and are still done in the east, but himself got a loom made, on which these kinds of tunics, vents, sleeves, and all, were woven in one piece. See much on this subject in Calmet. The clothes of a Hindoo are always without a seam; and the Brahmins would not wear clothes that were otherwise made. Besides, the Hindoos have no regular tailors.

Our Lord was now in the grand office of high priest, and was about to offer the expiatory victim for the sin of the world. And it is worthy of remark that the very dress he was in was similar to that of the Jewish high priest. The following is the description given of his dress by Josephus, Ant. b. iii. c. 7, s. 4: “Now this coat (citwn) was not composed of two pieces, nor was it sewed together upon the shoulders and sides, but it was one long vestment, so woven as to have an opening for the neck; not an oblique one, but parted all along the back and breast; it was also parted where the hands were to come out.” A little before, the same author says, that “the high priest had a long robe of a blue colour, which hung down to the feet, and was put over all the rest.” It is likely that this was the same with that upper garment which the soldiers divided among them, it being probably of a costly stuff. I may just add here, that I knew a woman who knit all kinds of clothes, even to the sleeves and button holes, without a seam; and have seen some of the garments which she made; that the thing is possible I have the fullest proof. For an explanation of citwn and imation which we translate cloak, and coat, see Clarke’s note on “Luke 6:29”.

Verses 23, 24. Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus — That is, erected the cross with him upon it; they took his garments, and made four parts, &c. — Because four soldiers only are mentioned in the division of the clothes, it does not follow that only four were present at the crucifixion. Since, if soldiers were necessary at all, a great number must have been present to keep off the crowds which usually press to see such spectacles as near as they can. From Matthew 27:54, it appears that the soldiers who assisted at the crucifixion were commanded by a centurion. It is therefore more than probable that the whole band, which Matthew tells us expressly was gathered together to scourge Jesus, (verse 27,) was present at his execution, especially as two others suffered at the same time. The four soldiers who parted his garments, and cast lots for his vesture, were the four who nailed him to the cross, (each of them fixing a limb,) and who, it seems, for this service had a right to the crucified person’s clothes. That the scripture might be fulfilled, &c. — That is, all this was done agreeably to an ancient prophecy, wherein these circumstances of the Messiah’s sufferings were mentioned, to show that he was to be crucified naked; and consequently, that he was to suffer a most ignominious, as well as a most painful death. The reader will observe that the words here referred to, they parted my garments among them, &c., are quoted from the 22d Psalm, where they seem to be spoken of David. But the fact is, that no circumstance of David’s life bore any resemblance to this prediction, or to several other passages in this Psalm. So that, in this portion of Scripture, as also in some others, the prophet seems to have been thrown into a preternatural ecstasy, wherein, personating the Messiah, he spoke barely what the Spirit dictated, without any regard to himself. These things therefore the soldiers did — Though with the utmost freedom as to themselves, yet by the secret disposal of Providence, which led them to act in a remarkable correspondence to the divine oracle.

Ver. 23. Then the soldiers — took his garments. These circumstances are more minutely related by John than by the other evangelists.

23. Of the parting of garments John, as an eye-witness and as an expositor of the prophetic fulfilment, gives the fullest statement. By the Roman law the garments of the executed malefactor went as perquisites to the executioner. And thus here a Roman custom strangely comes in to fulfil an ancient Hebrew prediction.

Between this full statement of John and the briefer one of Mark there is variation, but no contradiction. Mark says: “They parted his garments, casting lots upon them, what every man should take.” Here the garments are viewed in mass as being “parted,” and a “casting lots upon them” is affirmed; whether the cast lots affected the whole, or only a part, is not said. Still less is there a contradiction of Matthew, who says they “parted his garments, casting lots.” This only affirms that there was a casting lots, more or less, in the process of the division. These two statements are indefinite, but John’s precise.

Four parts—Hence, but four soldiers (commanded, perhaps, by a centurion) were required to crucify, numerous as was the band that first apprehended him. Coat—At this they arrived last, as being the under tunic or shirt. It was commonly worn by the priests, and consisted of two oblong pieces of cloth, fastened at the upper ends upon the shoulder with a clasp or buckle, and hanging down, before and behind to the feet.

V. 24. They parted my garments among them-No circumstance of David's life bore any resemblance to this, or to several other passages in the 22d Psalm. So that in this scripture, as in some others, the prophet seems to have been thrown into a preternatural ecstacy, wherein, personating the Messiah, he spoke barely what the Spirit dictated, without any regard to himself. Psalm 22:18.

Verse 24. That the scripture might be fulfilled] These words are found in the common printed text, in Matthew 27:35; but they are omitted by ABDEFGHKLMSU, Mt. BHV, 150 others; the principal versions, Chrysostom, Titus Bost., Euthymius, Theophylact, Origen, Hilary, Augustin, Juven. See Griesbach’s second edition. But in the text of John they are not omitted by one MS., version, or ancient commentator. The words are taken from Psalm 22:18, where it appears they were spoken prophetically of this treatment which Jesus received, upwards of a thousand years before it took place!

But it should be remarked that this form of speech, which frequently occurs, often means no more than that the thing so fell out that such a portion of Scripture may be exactly applied to it.

Verses 23, 24. Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus — That is, erected the cross with him upon it; they took his garments, and made four parts, &c. — Because four soldiers only are mentioned in the division of the clothes, it does not follow that only four were present at the crucifixion. Since, if soldiers were necessary at all, a great number must have been present to keep off the crowds which usually press to see such spectacles as near as they can. From Matthew 27:54, it appears that the soldiers who assisted at the crucifixion were commanded by a centurion. It is therefore more than probable that the whole band, which Matthew tells us expressly was gathered together to scourge Jesus, (verse 27,) was present at his execution, especially as two others suffered at the same time. The four soldiers who parted his garments, and cast lots for his vesture, were the four who nailed him to the cross, (each of them fixing a limb,) and who, it seems, for this service had a right to the crucified person’s clothes. That the scripture might be fulfilled, &c. — That is, all this was done agreeably to an ancient prophecy, wherein these circumstances of the Messiah’s sufferings were mentioned, to show that he was to be crucified naked; and consequently, that he was to suffer a most ignominious, as well as a most painful death. The reader will observe that the words here referred to, they parted my garments among them, &c., are quoted from the 22d Psalm, where they seem to be spoken of David. But the fact is, that no circumstance of David’s life bore any resemblance to this prediction, or to several other passages in this Psalm. So that, in this portion of Scripture, as also in some others, the prophet seems to have been thrown into a preternatural ecstasy, wherein, personating the Messiah, he spoke barely what the Spirit dictated, without any regard to himself. These things therefore the soldiers did — Though with the utmost freedom as to themselves, yet by the secret disposal of Providence, which led them to act in a remarkable correspondence to the divine oracle.

24. They said therefore—Amid the most solemn scene of human history, the unconscious actors sit down to gamble. Scripture—Psalm 22:18. This is one of the seven psalms which, as prefiguring the Messiah, are commonly called the Messianic Psalms. In this psalm David utters, as of his own person, sufferings he never endured, and glories too great for himself or any other merely human being. He undergoes the most terrible assaults from the most wicked and brutal of men, and through his deliverance brings about the conversion of the Gentiles to Jehovah. Hence the Jewish Church, as well as Christ and his apostles, held the psalm as describing the suffering Messiah. The fact that the Saviour’s tunic was a single woven piece, produced one of those literal fulfilments of the very words of prophecy by which its object is designated too plainly for the dullest mind to fail of seeing. Thereby the application of the more figurative parts is more decisively fixed. Cast lots—Each man’s name, token, or lot was placed in some receiver, an urn or perhaps a helmet, and either the receiver was so shaken as to throw out a lot, or the lot was fortuitously drawn from the receiver.

Jesus commits his mother to the care of John, 25-27.

V. 25. His mother's sister-But we do not read she had any brother. She was her father's heir, and as such transmitted the right of the kingdom of David to Jesus:

Mary, the wife of Cleopas-Called likewise Alpheus, the father, as Mary was the mother of James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas.

Verse 25. Mary the wife of Cleophas] She is said, in Matthew 27:56, (see the note there,) and Mark 15:40, to have been the mother of James the Less, and of Joses; and this James her son is said, in Matthew 10:3, to have been the son of Alpheus; hence it seems that Alpheus and Cleopas were the same person. To which may be added, that Hegesippus is quoted by Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. l. iii. c. 11, as saying that Cleopas was the brother of Joseph, the husband of the virgin. Theophylact says that Cleopas, (brother of Joseph, the husband of the virgin,) having died childless, his brother Joseph married his widow, by whom he had four sons, called by the evangelists the brothers of our Lord, and two daughters, the one named Salome, the other Mary, the daughter of Cleopas, because she was his daughter according to law, though she was the daughter of Joseph according to nature. There are several conjectures equally well founded with this last to be met with in the ancient commentators; but, in many cases, it is very difficult to distinguish the different Marys mentioned by the evangelists.

Verses 25-27. Now — While Jesus, hanging on the cross, suffered all manner of insults and sorrows; there stood by the cross his mother — “Neither her own danger, nor the sadness of the spectacle, nor the reproaches and insults of the people, could restrain her from performing the last office of duty and tenderness to her divine son on the cross. Grotius justly observes, that it was a noble instance of fortitude and zeal. Now a sword (according to Simeon’s prophecy, Luke 2:35) struck through her tender heart, and pierced her very soul; and perhaps the extremity of her sorrows might so overwhelm her spirits, as to render her incapable of attending the sepulchre, which we do not find that she did. Nor do we, indeed, meet with any thing after this in the sacred story concerning her, or in early antiquity: except that she continued among the disciples after our Lord’s ascension, which Luke observes, Acts 1:14.” And his mother’s sister, &c. — See note on Matthew 27:55, 56. When Jesus saw his mother, and the disciple whom he loved — Jesus was now in the depth of his own sufferings, yet when he saw his mother and her companions, their grief greatly affected him, particularly the distress of his mother. Therefore, though he was almost at the point of death, he spake a few words, in which he expressed his most affectionate regard to her. He saith, Woman, behold thy son — Meaning John. His words were intended to assure her that that disciple whom he loved would, for the sake of that love, supply the place of a son to her after he was gone; and therefore he desired her to consider him as such, and expect from him all the duty of a son. And — Besides expressing great filial affection toward his mother, he gave the beloved disciple also a token of his high esteem. He saith to him, Behold thy mother — To whom thou art now to perform the part of a son in my place; thus singling him out as that disciple on whom he could most depend to fulfil that duty, and thereby conferring upon him a peculiar honour. And from that hour — That is, from the time of our Lord’s death; that disciple took her unto his own home — And maintained her; Joseph, her husband, it seems, being dead. Thus, in the midst of the heaviest sufferings that ever human nature sustained, Jesus demonstrated a divine strength of benevolence. Even when his own distress was at the highest pitch, his friends had such a share of his concern, that their happiness for a while interrupted the feelings of his pains, and engrossed his thoughts.

Ver. 25. There stood by the cross — his mother, his mother’s sister — and Mary Magdalene. Mark says they stood “afar off,” as was the custom of the east; but as the crowd diminished, they approached nearer to the cross. Here the Saviour commended his mother to the care of John, who also was standing by the cross.

25. Stood by the cross—The same feeling of safety which induced John to enter the high priest’s palace, seems to have emboldened him at the head of his female company to make the nearest approach to the cross. No danger was to be apprehended from the Roman authorities, who so reluctantly surrendered even Jesus to death. The only harm could arise from the malice of the multitude. It was probably just as the shades of the supernatural darkness were dense enough to obscure their approaching figures, that they came within listening distance of the dying Saviour. Abruptly, and avoiding (perhaps for her safety) addressing her as mother, Jesus utters his last words to her. His mother’s sister—We suppose this clause to be in opposition with the clause following, and that his mother’s sister was Mary, wife of Cleopas; so that there are but three women here mentioned. Cleopas—Rather Clopas. See note on Luke 24:18.

Verse 26. The disciple-whom he loved] John, the writer of this Gospel. Woman, behold thy son!] This is a remarkable expression, and has been much misunderstood. It conveys no idea of disrespect, nor of unconcern, as has been commonly supposed. In the way of compellation, man! and woman! were titles of as much respect among the Hebrews as sir! and madam! are among us. But why does not Jesus call her mother? Probably because he wished to spare her feelings; he would not mention a name, the very sound of which must have wrung her heart with additional sorrow. On this account he says, Behold thy son! this was the language of pure natural affection: “Consider this crucified man no longer at present as any relative of thine; but take that disciple whom my power shall preserve from evil for thy son; and, while he considers thee as his mother, account him for thy child.” It is probable that it was because the keeping of the blessed virgin was entrusted to him that he was the only disciple of our Lord who died a natural death, God having preserved him for the sake of the person whom he gave him in charge. Many children are not only preserved alive, but abundantly prospered in temporal things, for the sake of the desolate parents whom God hast cast upon their care. It is very likely that Joseph was dead previously to this; and that this was the reason why the desolate virgin is committed to the care of the beloved disciple.

Verses 25-27. Now — While Jesus, hanging on the cross, suffered all manner of insults and sorrows; there stood by the cross his mother — “Neither her own danger, nor the sadness of the spectacle, nor the reproaches and insults of the people, could restrain her from performing the last office of duty and tenderness to her divine son on the cross. Grotius justly observes, that it was a noble instance of fortitude and zeal. Now a sword (according to Simeon’s prophecy, Luke 2:35) struck through her tender heart, and pierced her very soul; and perhaps the extremity of her sorrows might so overwhelm her spirits, as to render her incapable of attending the sepulchre, which we do not find that she did. Nor do we, indeed, meet with any thing after this in the sacred story concerning her, or in early antiquity: except that she continued among the disciples after our Lord’s ascension, which Luke observes, Acts 1:14.” And his mother’s sister, &c. — See note on Matthew 27:55, 56. When Jesus saw his mother, and the disciple whom he loved — Jesus was now in the depth of his own sufferings, yet when he saw his mother and her companions, their grief greatly affected him, particularly the distress of his mother. Therefore, though he was almost at the point of death, he spake a few words, in which he expressed his most affectionate regard to her. He saith, Woman, behold thy son — Meaning John. His words were intended to assure her that that disciple whom he loved would, for the sake of that love, supply the place of a son to her after he was gone; and therefore he desired her to consider him as such, and expect from him all the duty of a son. And — Besides expressing great filial affection toward his mother, he gave the beloved disciple also a token of his high esteem. He saith to him, Behold thy mother — To whom thou art now to perform the part of a son in my place; thus singling him out as that disciple on whom he could most depend to fulfil that duty, and thereby conferring upon him a peculiar honour. And from that hour — That is, from the time of our Lord’s death; that disciple took her unto his own home — And maintained her; Joseph, her husband, it seems, being dead. Thus, in the midst of the heaviest sufferings that ever human nature sustained, Jesus demonstrated a divine strength of benevolence. Even when his own distress was at the highest pitch, his friends had such a share of his concern, that their happiness for a while interrupted the feelings of his pains, and engrossed his thoughts.

26. Woman—The same respectful but not affectionate title addressed by Jesus to his mother at the wedding at Cana of Galilee. But for this repetition of the title, we should certainly infer that it was here used to avoid exposing his mother to the notice of the multitude. Why, then, did he not address her in this moment of sorrow by the endearing title of mother? We cannot but conclude that the title used indicates that officially he was a son no longer. Her maternity is transferred to another. And yet, in this moment of overwhelming suffering, the mind of Jesus takes care to remember the obligations due to the ties of nature. His garments, his last property, his foes have parted among themselves. His mother alone remaining, he places her as a precious deposit, not with her sons but with his best beloved disciple. See note on Matthew 13:55.

V. 27. Behold thy mother-To whom thou art now to perform the part of a son in my place, a peculiar honour which Christ conferred on him. From that hour-From the time of our Lord's death.

Verses 25-27. Now — While Jesus, hanging on the cross, suffered all manner of insults and sorrows; there stood by the cross his mother — “Neither her own danger, nor the sadness of the spectacle, nor the reproaches and insults of the people, could restrain her from performing the last office of duty and tenderness to her divine son on the cross. Grotius justly observes, that it was a noble instance of fortitude and zeal. Now a sword (according to Simeon’s prophecy, Luke 2:35) struck through her tender heart, and pierced her very soul; and perhaps the extremity of her sorrows might so overwhelm her spirits, as to render her incapable of attending the sepulchre, which we do not find that she did. Nor do we, indeed, meet with any thing after this in the sacred story concerning her, or in early antiquity: except that she continued among the disciples after our Lord’s ascension, which Luke observes, Acts 1:14.” And his mother’s sister, &c. — See note on Matthew 27:55, 56. When Jesus saw his mother, and the disciple whom he loved — Jesus was now in the depth of his own sufferings, yet when he saw his mother and her companions, their grief greatly affected him, particularly the distress of his mother. Therefore, though he was almost at the point of death, he spake a few words, in which he expressed his most affectionate regard to her. He saith, Woman, behold thy son — Meaning John. His words were intended to assure her that that disciple whom he loved would, for the sake of that love, supply the place of a son to her after he was gone; and therefore he desired her to consider him as such, and expect from him all the duty of a son. And — Besides expressing great filial affection toward his mother, he gave the beloved disciple also a token of his high esteem. He saith to him, Behold thy mother — To whom thou art now to perform the part of a son in my place; thus singling him out as that disciple on whom he could most depend to fulfil that duty, and thereby conferring upon him a peculiar honour. And from that hour — That is, from the time of our Lord’s death; that disciple took her unto his own home — And maintained her; Joseph, her husband, it seems, being dead. Thus, in the midst of the heaviest sufferings that ever human nature sustained, Jesus demonstrated a divine strength of benevolence. Even when his own distress was at the highest pitch, his friends had such a share of his concern, that their happiness for a while interrupted the feelings of his pains, and engrossed his thoughts.

27. Unto his own home—Doubtless to his own immediate residence in Jerusalem; next, to his home in Galilee; and finally, perhaps, to Ephesus, his last abode in Asia Minor. See our note on Matthew 1:18. That John had a home at Jerusalem is implied by the phrase from that hour, as he remained some time in Jerusalem.

The writers of the Romish Church, assuming that John was committed to the protection of Mary, use this passage as an argument in support of Mariolatry. John is made to represent the Church, which is bound to solicit the guardianship of this “Mother of God.” All this is precisely the reverse of the fact. Mary was committed to the protection of John, not John to the protection of Mary.

The thirst and death of Jesus, 28-30.

Verse 28. I thirst.] The scripture that referred to his drinking the vinegar is Psalm 69:21. The fatigue which he had undergone, the grief he had felt, the heat of the day, and the loss of blood, were the natural causes of this thirst. This he would have borne without complaint; but he wished to give them the fullest proof of his being the Messiah, by distinctly marking how every thing relative to the Messiah, which had been written in the prophets, had its complete fulfilment in him.

Verses 28-30. After this — After what is related above; and after other events recorded by the other evangelists, such as the three hours supernatural darkness, and the doleful exclamation of Jesus, Eloi, Eloi, &c., of which see notes on Matthew 27:46, 47; Mark 15:34; Jesus, knowing that all things — All the grievous and terrible sufferings he had to endure; were now upon the point of being accomplished — And being parched with a violent drought: that the scripture might be fulfilled — Where the Messiah is described as crying out, My tongue cleaveth to my jaws, and in my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink, (Psalm 22:15, 69:21,) to show that he endured all that had been foretold concerning him; saith, I thirst. Now there was set — As usual on such occasions; a vessel full of vinegar — Near the cross: as vinegar and water was the common drink of the Roman soldiers, perhaps this vinegar was set here for their use. And they filled a sponge with vinegar, and put it upon hyssop — That is, a stalk of hyssop; and put it to his mouth — In a contemptuous manner. See note on Matthew 27:48. “There must have been some plant in Judea of the lowest class of trees, or shrubs, which was either a species of hyssop, or had a strong resemblance to what the Greeks called usswpov; inasmuch as the Hellenist Jews always distinguished it by that name. It is said of Solomon, (1 Kings 4:33,) that he spake of trees, from the cedar tree that is in Lebanon, even unto the hyssop that springeth out of the wall. Now they did not reckon among trees any plants but such as had durable and woody stalks, see note on Matthew 6:30. That their hyssop was of this kind, is evident also from the uses of sprinkling, to which it is in many cases appointed by the law to be applied.” — Campbell. When Jesus had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished — The predictions of the prophets that respect my personal ministry are all fulfilled. The important work of man’s redemption is accomplished. The demands of the law, and of divine justice, are satisfied, and my sufferings are now at an end. It appears from Matthew, Mark, and Luke, that in speaking these words he cried with an exceeding loud voice; probably to show that his strength was not exhausted, but that he was about to give up his life of his own accord. Having thus shouted, he addressed his Father, with a tone of voice proper in prayer; saying, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit, and then bowed his head, and gave up the ghost — Leaving us the best pattern of a recommendatory prayer in the article of death. See note on Matthew 27:50; Luke 23:46.

Ver. 28. I thirst. Our Saviour, finding that all was accomplished which he was to do before his death, except the fulfilling of that one scripture, Psalm 69:21, “they gave me vinegar to drink,” for the accomplishment thereof now said, “I thirst.” Such were the agonies of our Lord upon the cross, that they drank up his very spirits. When he cried, “‘I thirst,” it was to show that whatever was foretold by the prophets concerning him was exactly accomplished, and every minutiæ of circumstance fulfilled.

28. After this—That is, subsequent not merely to the event last narrated, but to all the events narrated. The last preceding event was the cry of Jesus, “Eloi, Eloi;” and the present furnishing of drink is parallel with Matthew 27:48. All things… accomplished—All his sufferings up to the now closing point. Scripture… fulfilled—Some commentators refer this clause to what precedes; and the sense would then be that all things were accomplished in order to the fulfilment of Scripture. Stier more properly refers it to what follows; and the sense would then be that Jesus, in order to the fulfilment of Scripture, said, “I thirst.” We would, however, so extend as to include 29, 30. In order to the fulfilment of Scripture, Jesus, after the satisfaction of his predicted thirst, uttered the final “It is finished,” and expired. I thirst—The briefest but not least significant of the Lord’s utterances upon the cross. The reference may be to Psalm 22:15, or rather to Psalm 69:21: “They gave me also gall for my meat; and in my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink.” It must not be conceived that our Lord, in a servile way, directed his mind to the interpretation of Scripture in these agonizing moments; yet, in a full, calm, glorious consciousness, he trod the path foreknown of God. He acts in the full spirit of Psalm 40:7: “Then said I, Lo, I come; in the volume of the book it is written of me, I delight to do thy will, O my God.” Hitherto in the great agonies of his soul there had been little thought for the pains of the body. His utterance, as Lange well says, “is like the words of a hero, to whose consciousness it now first occurs that his wounds are bleeding, and that he needs some invigoration after the heat of the conflict has been sustained.” And thirst is a deeper suffering than hunger. After the bloody sweat of Gethsemane, the sleepless night of his trial, the scourgings, the loss of blood, and the unknown mental agonies, the fluids of his system became exhausted, and the glorious sufferer has not, perhaps, strength to utter his cry of final triumph. Meekly, like a lamb bleating to its slaughterers, he utters the feeble expression of his need. He consents to receive the aid of his murderers. Invigorated in body by the natural supply, he hastens in spirit, with brief, rapid utterances, to the consummation.

V. 29. A stalk of hyssop-Which in those countries grows exceeding large and strong. Psalm 69:21.

Verse 29. A vessel full of vinegar] This was probably that tart small wine which we are assured was the common drink of the Roman soldiers. Our word vinegar comes from the French vin aigre, sour or tart wine; and, although it is probable that it was brought at this time for the use of the four Roman soldiers who were employed in the crucifixion of our Lord, yet it is as probable that it might have been furnished for the use of the persons crucified; who, in that lingering kind of death, must necessarily be grievously tormented with thirst. This vinegar must not be confounded with the vinegar and gall mentioned Matthew 27:34, and Mark 15:23. That, being a stupifying potion, intended to alleviate his pain, he refused to drink; but of this he took a little, and then expired, John 19:30.

And put it upon hyssop] Or, according to others, putting hyssop about it. A great variety of conjectures have been produced to solve the difficulty in this text, which is occasioned by supposing that the sponge was put on a stalk of hyssop, and that this is the reed mentioned by Matthew and Mark. It is possible that the hyssop might grow to such a size in Judea as that a stalk of it might answer the end of a reed or cane in the case mentioned here; but still it appears to me more natural to suppose that the reed was a distinct thing and that the hyssop was used only to bind the sponge fast to the reed; unless we may suppose it was added for some mystical purpose, as we find it frequently used in the Old Testament in rites of purification. The various conjectures on this point may be seen in Bowyer’s Conject. and in Calmet.

Verses 28-30. After this — After what is related above; and after other events recorded by the other evangelists, such as the three hours supernatural darkness, and the doleful exclamation of Jesus, Eloi, Eloi, &c., of which see notes on Matthew 27:46, 47; Mark 15:34; Jesus, knowing that all things — All the grievous and terrible sufferings he had to endure; were now upon the point of being accomplished — And being parched with a violent drought: that the scripture might be fulfilled — Where the Messiah is described as crying out, My tongue cleaveth to my jaws, and in my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink, (Psalm 22:15, 69:21,) to show that he endured all that had been foretold concerning him; saith, I thirst. Now there was set — As usual on such occasions; a vessel full of vinegar — Near the cross: as vinegar and water was the common drink of the Roman soldiers, perhaps this vinegar was set here for their use. And they filled a sponge with vinegar, and put it upon hyssop — That is, a stalk of hyssop; and put it to his mouth — In a contemptuous manner. See note on Matthew 27:48. “There must have been some plant in Judea of the lowest class of trees, or shrubs, which was either a species of hyssop, or had a strong resemblance to what the Greeks called usswpov; inasmuch as the Hellenist Jews always distinguished it by that name. It is said of Solomon, (1 Kings 4:33,) that he spake of trees, from the cedar tree that is in Lebanon, even unto the hyssop that springeth out of the wall. Now they did not reckon among trees any plants but such as had durable and woody stalks, see note on Matthew 6:30. That their hyssop was of this kind, is evident also from the uses of sprinkling, to which it is in many cases appointed by the law to be applied.” — Campbell. When Jesus had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished — The predictions of the prophets that respect my personal ministry are all fulfilled. The important work of man’s redemption is accomplished. The demands of the law, and of divine justice, are satisfied, and my sufferings are now at an end. It appears from Matthew, Mark, and Luke, that in speaking these words he cried with an exceeding loud voice; probably to show that his strength was not exhausted, but that he was about to give up his life of his own accord. Having thus shouted, he addressed his Father, with a tone of voice proper in prayer; saying, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit, and then bowed his head, and gave up the ghost — Leaving us the best pattern of a recommendatory prayer in the article of death. See note on Matthew 27:50; Luke 23:46.

29. Hyssop—It is not well known what plant is here specified. But a sort of hyssop is described with a seedy stalk about a foot and a half long. Such a stalk would have been long enough to reach the mouth of a crucified person, inasmuch as the cross was not usually very elevated.

V. 30. It is finished-My suffering: the purchase of man's redemption. He delivered up his spirit-To God, Matthew 27:50.

Verse 30. It is finished] As if he had said: “I have executed the great designs of the Almighty-I have satisfied the demands of his justice-I have accomplished all that was written in the prophets, and suffered the utmost malice of my enemies; and now the way to the holy of holies is made manifest through my blood.” An awful, yet a glorious finish. Through this tragical death God is reconciled to man, and the kingdom of heaven opened to every believing soul.

“Shout heaven and earth, this SUM of good to MAN!”

See Clarke’s note on “Matthew 27:50”.

The prodigies which happened at our Lord’s death, and which are mentioned by the other three evangelists, are omitted by John, because he found the others had sufficiently stated them, and it appears he had nothing new to add.

Verses 28-30. After this — After what is related above; and after other events recorded by the other evangelists, such as the three hours supernatural darkness, and the doleful exclamation of Jesus, Eloi, Eloi, &c., of which see notes on Matthew 27:46, 47; Mark 15:34; Jesus, knowing that all things — All the grievous and terrible sufferings he had to endure; were now upon the point of being accomplished — And being parched with a violent drought: that the scripture might be fulfilled — Where the Messiah is described as crying out, My tongue cleaveth to my jaws, and in my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink, (Psalm 22:15, 69:21,) to show that he endured all that had been foretold concerning him; saith, I thirst. Now there was set — As usual on such occasions; a vessel full of vinegar — Near the cross: as vinegar and water was the common drink of the Roman soldiers, perhaps this vinegar was set here for their use. And they filled a sponge with vinegar, and put it upon hyssop — That is, a stalk of hyssop; and put it to his mouth — In a contemptuous manner. See note on Matthew 27:48. “There must have been some plant in Judea of the lowest class of trees, or shrubs, which was either a species of hyssop, or had a strong resemblance to what the Greeks called usswpov; inasmuch as the Hellenist Jews always distinguished it by that name. It is said of Solomon, (1 Kings 4:33,) that he spake of trees, from the cedar tree that is in Lebanon, even unto the hyssop that springeth out of the wall. Now they did not reckon among trees any plants but such as had durable and woody stalks, see note on Matthew 6:30. That their hyssop was of this kind, is evident also from the uses of sprinkling, to which it is in many cases appointed by the law to be applied.” — Campbell. When Jesus had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished — The predictions of the prophets that respect my personal ministry are all fulfilled. The important work of man’s redemption is accomplished. The demands of the law, and of divine justice, are satisfied, and my sufferings are now at an end. It appears from Matthew, Mark, and Luke, that in speaking these words he cried with an exceeding loud voice; probably to show that his strength was not exhausted, but that he was about to give up his life of his own accord. Having thus shouted, he addressed his Father, with a tone of voice proper in prayer; saying, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit, and then bowed his head, and gave up the ghost — Leaving us the best pattern of a recommendatory prayer in the article of death. See note on Matthew 27:50; Luke 23:46.

Ver. 30. He said, it is finished. Thus the Saviour died in the faith, with the words of Daniel in his mouth. This is the faith that conquers death. I see heaven open, said Stephen, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God.

30. Vinegar—The poscha or acid drink sufficiently stimulant to quench thirst, used by the common soldiery. It is finished—That is, the great work of suffering is finished. Primarily it thus has a reference to the past. Yet all the great results which that past suffering embodies are secured and accomplished. The great reparation for the fall of man is achieved, and in that achievement a glorious eternity for the human race, conditioned upon faith, is purchased. Through suffering and death Christ has acquired the right to bestow salvation upon all who believe. It is true, death has not yet been quite completely passed at this utterance. Yet it is by anticipation held as past, inasmuch as the yielding moment has now arrived. See opening note to chap. 17. Jesus is like a mighty swimmer, who, before leaping into the deep waters, exclaims, “The bottom is touched.” Bowed his head— With visible submission to death. The Evangelist describes like an eye-witness, which he claims to be. His brief, vivid words paint to the eye of the Church of all ages the pale, placid face and reclining head of Jesus reposing in death. Gave up the ghost—With words of voluntary surrender, furnished by Luke in the parallel passage.

V. 31. Lest the bodies should remain on the cross on the Sabbath-Which they would have accounted a profanation of any Sabbath, but of that in particular.

For that Sabbath was a great day-Being not only a Sabbath, but the second day of the feast of unleavened bread (from whence they reckoned the weeks to pentecost:) and also the day for presenting and offering the sheaf of new corn: so that it was a treble solemnity.

Verse 31. It was the preparation] Every Sabbath had a preparation which began at the ninth hour (that is, three o’clock) the preceding evening. Josephus, Ant. b. xvi. c. 6, s. 2, recites an edict of the Emperor Augustus in favour of the Jews, which orders, “that no one shall be obliged to give bail or surety on the Sabbath day, nor on the preparation before it, after the ninth hour.” The time fixed here was undoubtedly in conformity to the Jewish custom, as they began their preparation at three o’clock on the Friday evening.

That the bodies should not remain] For the law, Deuteronomy 21:22, 23, ordered that the bodies of criminals should not hang all night; and they did not wish to have the Sabbath profaned by either taking them down on that day, or letting them hang to disturb the joy of that holy time. Probably their consciences began to sting them for what they had done, and they wished to remove the victim of their malice out of their sight. For that Sabbath day was a high day] 1. Because it was the Sabbath. 2. Because it was the day on which all the people presented themselves in the temple according to the command, Exodus 23:17. 3. Because that was the day on which the sheaf of the first fruits was offered, according to the command, Leviticus 23:10, 11. So that upon this day there happened to be three solemnities in one.-Lightfoot. It might be properly called a high day, because the passover fell on that Sabbath.

Their legs might be broken] Lactantius says. l. iv. c. 26, that it was a common custom to break the legs or other bones of criminals upon the cross; and this appears to have been a kind of coup de grace, the sooner to put them out of pain.

Verses 31-37. That the bodies should not remain on the cross — It was customary among the Romans to let the bodies of persons who had been executed continue on the crosses, or stakes, till they were devoured by birds or beasts of prey. But the law of Moses expressly prohibited the Jews from suffering the bodies of those who were hanged to remain all night on the trees, Deuteronomy 21:22; for that reason, as well as because the sabbath was at hand, which would have been profaned by their remaining, especially as that sabbath was a day of peculiar solemnity, being the second day of the feast of unleavened bread, (from whence they reckoned the weeks to pentecost,) and also the day for presenting and offering the sheaf of new corn; therefore, the Jews besought Pilate that the legs of the three crucified persons might be broken, to hasten their death; and Pilate consented, and gave the order they desired. Then came the soldiers — Who guarded the execution; and brake the legs of the first — Malefactor, or of him that hung nearest the place where they had been sitting; and then, passing by Jesus, who hung in the middle, they went and brake the legs of the other, who was crucified with him. But when they came to Jesus, perceiving that he was dead already — They did not take the trouble of breaking his legs; but one of the soldiers — Had so much boldness and inhumanity that, with a spear, which he had in his hand, he pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water — Real blood and real water; the spear having pierced both the pericardium and heart, the water issuing from the former and the blood from the latter; a wound which must inevitably have killed him, had he been living when it was given, and which consequently put it out of all doubt that he was really dead, before he was taken down from the cross; a point of infinite importance to be ascertained. For the grand evidence of Christ’s mission is his resurrection, which implies the certainty of his death. On that account, crucifixion might have seemed, on a slight view, a less proper execution than some others, such as beheading, burning, and the like; but this wound, which pierced his heart, would effectually exclude all pretences of his having been taken down alive by his friends; and hence, false and malicious as his enemies were, we do not find that they ever had recourse to such an evasion. Accordingly, as it was of such importance to mankind to be ascertained of the truth of Christ’s death, the evangelist here, in speaking of it, attests this circumstance, which demonstrates it, as being a thing which he himself saw; saying, And he that saw it bare record, &c., and he knoweth — By the most certain testimony of his senses; that he saith true — And he makes this declaration that you, whoever you are, into whose hands this history may come, may believe — And may be confirmed in your adherence to that gospel which is established on the death and resurrection of Christ. Of the mystical meaning of the blood and water which issued out of the side of Christ, see the note on 1 John 5:6. For these things were done — Or were permitted to be done, in the course of divine providence, however inconsiderable they may appear, that the scripture should be fulfilled — That is, Jesus’s legs were not broken, that the passage, (Exodus 12:46,) Neither shall ye break a bone thereof, might be fulfilled. “These words were primarily spoken of the paschal lamb, whose bones were not to be broken, that it might be a fit representation of the Messiah, typified by this sacrifice; and who, though he was to suffer a violent death, was to have none of his bones broken, because he was to rise from the dead on the third day. Wherefore, as the scripture which speaks of the type has necessarily a reference to the antitype, the evangelist had good reason to interpret what is there said of the paschal lamb, as prophetical of this circumstance of our Lord’s death. And the rather, as by so doing he makes his readers sensible it was not owing to accident that the soldiers treated Christ’s body otherwise than they treated the bodies of those who were crucified with him. It happened by the direction of God, who had always determined that Christ should rise from the dead, and that his mission should be fully demonstrated by the evidence of miracles and prophecies united. John observes also, that Christ’s side was pierced with a spear, because another scripture (Zechariah 12:10) had said They shall look on him whom they have pierced;” that is, they who have occasioned his sufferings by their sins, (and who has not?) shall either look upon him in this world with penitential sorrow, or with terror when he cometh in the clouds of heaven, Revelation 1:7.

§ 142.—THE TRANSACTIONS OF JESUS’S DEATH AND ENTOMBMENT, 31-42.

31. Bodies should not remain—By the more barbarous Roman custom the bodies of the malefactors could remain upon the cross until disintegrated by corruption or devoured by birds. But by the Mosaic law (Deuteronomy 21:23) they must be removed and buried before nightfall. The Jewish rulers doubtless desired that the corpse of Jesus should be as soon as possible removed from public sight. A high day—The Jewish Saturday-Sabbath after the crucifixion-Friday, being both the sabbath and a Passover day, was a great day. Legs might be broken—The crucifragium or leg-breaking was a Roman custom in cases of crucifixion, performed upon the malefactor before he was taken from the cross. The fracture was inflicted with an iron mallet upon the instep or ankle. This would leave the weight of the body to be sustained by the hands and upper parts, and cause exquisite agony to the victim not already beyond the reach of pain.

Verses 31-37. That the bodies should not remain on the cross — It was customary among the Romans to let the bodies of persons who had been executed continue on the crosses, or stakes, till they were devoured by birds or beasts of prey. But the law of Moses expressly prohibited the Jews from suffering the bodies of those who were hanged to remain all night on the trees, Deuteronomy 21:22; for that reason, as well as because the sabbath was at hand, which would have been profaned by their remaining, especially as that sabbath was a day of peculiar solemnity, being the second day of the feast of unleavened bread, (from whence they reckoned the weeks to pentecost,) and also the day for presenting and offering the sheaf of new corn; therefore, the Jews besought Pilate that the legs of the three crucified persons might be broken, to hasten their death; and Pilate consented, and gave the order they desired. Then came the soldiers — Who guarded the execution; and brake the legs of the first — Malefactor, or of him that hung nearest the place where they had been sitting; and then, passing by Jesus, who hung in the middle, they went and brake the legs of the other, who was crucified with him. But when they came to Jesus, perceiving that he was dead already — They did not take the trouble of breaking his legs; but one of the soldiers — Had so much boldness and inhumanity that, with a spear, which he had in his hand, he pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water — Real blood and real water; the spear having pierced both the pericardium and heart, the water issuing from the former and the blood from the latter; a wound which must inevitably have killed him, had he been living when it was given, and which consequently put it out of all doubt that he was really dead, before he was taken down from the cross; a point of infinite importance to be ascertained. For the grand evidence of Christ’s mission is his resurrection, which implies the certainty of his death. On that account, crucifixion might have seemed, on a slight view, a less proper execution than some others, such as beheading, burning, and the like; but this wound, which pierced his heart, would effectually exclude all pretences of his having been taken down alive by his friends; and hence, false and malicious as his enemies were, we do not find that they ever had recourse to such an evasion. Accordingly, as it was of such importance to mankind to be ascertained of the truth of Christ’s death, the evangelist here, in speaking of it, attests this circumstance, which demonstrates it, as being a thing which he himself saw; saying, And he that saw it bare record, &c., and he knoweth — By the most certain testimony of his senses; that he saith true — And he makes this declaration that you, whoever you are, into whose hands this history may come, may believe — And may be confirmed in your adherence to that gospel which is established on the death and resurrection of Christ. Of the mystical meaning of the blood and water which issued out of the side of Christ, see the note on 1 John 5:6. For these things were done — Or were permitted to be done, in the course of divine providence, however inconsiderable they may appear, that the scripture should be fulfilled — That is, Jesus’s legs were not broken, that the passage, (Exodus 12:46,) Neither shall ye break a bone thereof, might be fulfilled. “These words were primarily spoken of the paschal lamb, whose bones were not to be broken, that it might be a fit representation of the Messiah, typified by this sacrifice; and who, though he was to suffer a violent death, was to have none of his bones broken, because he was to rise from the dead on the third day. Wherefore, as the scripture which speaks of the type has necessarily a reference to the antitype, the evangelist had good reason to interpret what is there said of the paschal lamb, as prophetical of this circumstance of our Lord’s death. And the rather, as by so doing he makes his readers sensible it was not owing to accident that the soldiers treated Christ’s body otherwise than they treated the bodies of those who were crucified with him. It happened by the direction of God, who had always determined that Christ should rise from the dead, and that his mission should be fully demonstrated by the evidence of miracles and prophecies united. John observes also, that Christ’s side was pierced with a spear, because another scripture (Zechariah 12:10) had said They shall look on him whom they have pierced;” that is, they who have occasioned his sufferings by their sins, (and who has not?) shall either look upon him in this world with penitential sorrow, or with terror when he cometh in the clouds of heaven, Revelation 1:7.

Ver. 32-37. Then came the soldiers, at three o’clock, the proper hour. — And he that saw bare record, and his record is true, concerning occurrences apparently casual, but which to the letter fulfilled the scriptures. What, Roman soldiers, ignorant of the scriptures, break the legs of the first thief, and then passing by the Saviour who was now dead, break the legs of the second thief, to fulfil the letter of the law concerning the paschal lamb, which enjoined that not a bone of it should be broken! Exodus 12:46. Equally remarkable is the piercing of the Redeemer’s side, whence issued “water and blood,” as in 1 John 5:8. By water is understood the serum of the pericardium, in which the heart swims, or rather is lubricated. Therefore the water would issue first, and the blood instantly follow. How exact is the narration of John. All was now finished: they looked on him whom they had pierced. Zechariah 12:10.

32. Came the soldiers—At a little after three o’clock the soldiers, either the four who had watched the crucifixion, or a special number sent by Pilate, came to the two thieves first and to Jesus last, as being in the middle.

Verses 31-37. That the bodies should not remain on the cross — It was customary among the Romans to let the bodies of persons who had been executed continue on the crosses, or stakes, till they were devoured by birds or beasts of prey. But the law of Moses expressly prohibited the Jews from suffering the bodies of those who were hanged to remain all night on the trees, Deuteronomy 21:22; for that reason, as well as because the sabbath was at hand, which would have been profaned by their remaining, especially as that sabbath was a day of peculiar solemnity, being the second day of the feast of unleavened bread, (from whence they reckoned the weeks to pentecost,) and also the day for presenting and offering the sheaf of new corn; therefore, the Jews besought Pilate that the legs of the three crucified persons might be broken, to hasten their death; and Pilate consented, and gave the order they desired. Then came the soldiers — Who guarded the execution; and brake the legs of the first — Malefactor, or of him that hung nearest the place where they had been sitting; and then, passing by Jesus, who hung in the middle, they went and brake the legs of the other, who was crucified with him. But when they came to Jesus, perceiving that he was dead already — They did not take the trouble of breaking his legs; but one of the soldiers — Had so much boldness and inhumanity that, with a spear, which he had in his hand, he pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water — Real blood and real water; the spear having pierced both the pericardium and heart, the water issuing from the former and the blood from the latter; a wound which must inevitably have killed him, had he been living when it was given, and which consequently put it out of all doubt that he was really dead, before he was taken down from the cross; a point of infinite importance to be ascertained. For the grand evidence of Christ’s mission is his resurrection, which implies the certainty of his death. On that account, crucifixion might have seemed, on a slight view, a less proper execution than some others, such as beheading, burning, and the like; but this wound, which pierced his heart, would effectually exclude all pretences of his having been taken down alive by his friends; and hence, false and malicious as his enemies were, we do not find that they ever had recourse to such an evasion. Accordingly, as it was of such importance to mankind to be ascertained of the truth of Christ’s death, the evangelist here, in speaking of it, attests this circumstance, which demonstrates it, as being a thing which he himself saw; saying, And he that saw it bare record, &c., and he knoweth — By the most certain testimony of his senses; that he saith true — And he makes this declaration that you, whoever you are, into whose hands this history may come, may believe — And may be confirmed in your adherence to that gospel which is established on the death and resurrection of Christ. Of the mystical meaning of the blood and water which issued out of the side of Christ, see the note on 1 John 5:6. For these things were done — Or were permitted to be done, in the course of divine providence, however inconsiderable they may appear, that the scripture should be fulfilled — That is, Jesus’s legs were not broken, that the passage, (Exodus 12:46,) Neither shall ye break a bone thereof, might be fulfilled. “These words were primarily spoken of the paschal lamb, whose bones were not to be broken, that it might be a fit representation of the Messiah, typified by this sacrifice; and who, though he was to suffer a violent death, was to have none of his bones broken, because he was to rise from the dead on the third day. Wherefore, as the scripture which speaks of the type has necessarily a reference to the antitype, the evangelist had good reason to interpret what is there said of the paschal lamb, as prophetical of this circumstance of our Lord’s death. And the rather, as by so doing he makes his readers sensible it was not owing to accident that the soldiers treated Christ’s body otherwise than they treated the bodies of those who were crucified with him. It happened by the direction of God, who had always determined that Christ should rise from the dead, and that his mission should be fully demonstrated by the evidence of miracles and prophecies united. John observes also, that Christ’s side was pierced with a spear, because another scripture (Zechariah 12:10) had said They shall look on him whom they have pierced;” that is, they who have occasioned his sufferings by their sins, (and who has not?) shall either look upon him in this world with penitential sorrow, or with terror when he cometh in the clouds of heaven, Revelation 1:7.

Ver. 32-37. Then came the soldiers, at three o’clock, the proper hour. — And he that saw bare record, and his record is true, concerning occurrences apparently casual, but which to the letter fulfilled the scriptures. What, Roman soldiers, ignorant of the scriptures, break the legs of the first thief, and then passing by the Saviour who was now dead, break the legs of the second thief, to fulfil the letter of the law concerning the paschal lamb, which enjoined that not a bone of it should be broken! Exodus 12:46. Equally remarkable is the piercing of the Redeemer’s side, whence issued “water and blood,” as in 1 John 5:8. By water is understood the serum of the pericardium, in which the heart swims, or rather is lubricated. Therefore the water would issue first, and the blood instantly follow. How exact is the narration of John. All was now finished: they looked on him whom they had pierced. Zechariah 12:10.

33. Jesus… dead already—Our Lord had been upon the cross but some six hours, and malefactors have been known to endure the pains of crucifixion for two or three days. But the extraordinary sufferings of Jesus had speedily wrought their work upon his delicate though healthy frame. The question raised by modern sceptics, whether Jesus really died, or whether his present state was a swoon from which he may have recovered, was unknown to the ancient Church. That age as little doubted the reality of his death as those soldiers, who now examined and pronounced him dead already.

V. 34. Forthwith there came out blood and water-It was strange, seeing he was dead, that blood should come out; more strange, that water also; and most strange of all, that both should come out immediately, at one time, and yet distinctly. It was pure and true water, as well as pure and true blood. The asseveration of the beholder and testifier of it, shows both the truth and greatness of the miracle and mystery.

Verse 34. With a spear pierced his side] The soldier who pierced our Lord’s side has been called by the Roman Catholic writers Longinus, which seems to be a corruption of logch, lonche, a spear or dart, the word in the text. They moreover tell us that this man was converted-that it was he who said, Truly this was the Son of God-that he travelled into Cappadocia, and there preached the Gospel of Christ, and received the crown of martyrdom. But this deserves the same credit as the other legends of the Popish Church.

Whether it was the right or the left side of Christ that was pierced has been a matter of serious discussion among divines and physicians; and on this subject they are not yet agreed. That it is of no importance we are sure, because the Holy Ghost has not revealed it. Luke Cranache, a famous painter, whose piece of the crucifixion is at Augsburg, has put no wound on either side: when he was asked the reason of this-I will do it, said he, when I am informed WHICH side was pierced.

Blood and water.] It may be naturally supposed that the spear went through the pericardium and pierced the heart; that the water proceeded from the former, and the blood from the latter. Ambrose, Augustin, and Chrysostom, make the blood an emblem of the eucharist, and the water an emblem of baptism. Others represent them as the emblems of the old and new covenants. Protestants have thought them the emblems of justification, which is through the blood of the Lamb, and sanctification, which is through the washing of regeneration; and it is in reference to the first notion that they mingle the wine with water in the sacrament of the Lord’s supper. The piercing appears to have taken place because his legs were not broken; and, as the law in this case stated that the criminals were to continue on the cross till they died, the side of our Lord was pierced to secure the accomplishment of the law; and the issuing of the blood and water appears to be only a natural effect of the above cause, and probably nothing mystical or spiritual was intended by it. However, it affords the fullest proof that Jesus died for our sins. Dr. Lightfoot thinks that there is a reference here to the rock in the wilderness which Moses smote twice, and which, according to the Jews, Shemoth Rabba, fol. 122, “poured out blood at the first stroke, and water at the second.” Now St. Paul says, 1 Corinthians 10:4, That rock was Christ; and here the evangelist says, the soldier pierced his side, and there came out blood and water. St. John therefore, in what he asserts in the 35th and 36th verses, {John 19:35, 36} wishes to call the attention of the Jews to this point, in order to show them that this Jesus was the true Messiah, who was typified by the rock in the wilderness. He knoweth that he saith true, that ye might believe.

Verses 31-37. That the bodies should not remain on the cross — It was customary among the Romans to let the bodies of persons who had been executed continue on the crosses, or stakes, till they were devoured by birds or beasts of prey. But the law of Moses expressly prohibited the Jews from suffering the bodies of those who were hanged to remain all night on the trees, Deuteronomy 21:22; for that reason, as well as because the sabbath was at hand, which would have been profaned by their remaining, especially as that sabbath was a day of peculiar solemnity, being the second day of the feast of unleavened bread, (from whence they reckoned the weeks to pentecost,) and also the day for presenting and offering the sheaf of new corn; therefore, the Jews besought Pilate that the legs of the three crucified persons might be broken, to hasten their death; and Pilate consented, and gave the order they desired. Then came the soldiers — Who guarded the execution; and brake the legs of the first — Malefactor, or of him that hung nearest the place where they had been sitting; and then, passing by Jesus, who hung in the middle, they went and brake the legs of the other, who was crucified with him. But when they came to Jesus, perceiving that he was dead already — They did not take the trouble of breaking his legs; but one of the soldiers — Had so much boldness and inhumanity that, with a spear, which he had in his hand, he pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water — Real blood and real water; the spear having pierced both the pericardium and heart, the water issuing from the former and the blood from the latter; a wound which must inevitably have killed him, had he been living when it was given, and which consequently put it out of all doubt that he was really dead, before he was taken down from the cross; a point of infinite importance to be ascertained. For the grand evidence of Christ’s mission is his resurrection, which implies the certainty of his death. On that account, crucifixion might have seemed, on a slight view, a less proper execution than some others, such as beheading, burning, and the like; but this wound, which pierced his heart, would effectually exclude all pretences of his having been taken down alive by his friends; and hence, false and malicious as his enemies were, we do not find that they ever had recourse to such an evasion. Accordingly, as it was of such importance to mankind to be ascertained of the truth of Christ’s death, the evangelist here, in speaking of it, attests this circumstance, which demonstrates it, as being a thing which he himself saw; saying, And he that saw it bare record, &c., and he knoweth — By the most certain testimony of his senses; that he saith true — And he makes this declaration that you, whoever you are, into whose hands this history may come, may believe — And may be confirmed in your adherence to that gospel which is established on the death and resurrection of Christ. Of the mystical meaning of the blood and water which issued out of the side of Christ, see the note on 1 John 5:6. For these things were done — Or were permitted to be done, in the course of divine providence, however inconsiderable they may appear, that the scripture should be fulfilled — That is, Jesus’s legs were not broken, that the passage, (Exodus 12:46,) Neither shall ye break a bone thereof, might be fulfilled. “These words were primarily spoken of the paschal lamb, whose bones were not to be broken, that it might be a fit representation of the Messiah, typified by this sacrifice; and who, though he was to suffer a violent death, was to have none of his bones broken, because he was to rise from the dead on the third day. Wherefore, as the scripture which speaks of the type has necessarily a reference to the antitype, the evangelist had good reason to interpret what is there said of the paschal lamb, as prophetical of this circumstance of our Lord’s death. And the rather, as by so doing he makes his readers sensible it was not owing to accident that the soldiers treated Christ’s body otherwise than they treated the bodies of those who were crucified with him. It happened by the direction of God, who had always determined that Christ should rise from the dead, and that his mission should be fully demonstrated by the evidence of miracles and prophecies united. John observes also, that Christ’s side was pierced with a spear, because another scripture (Zechariah 12:10) had said They shall look on him whom they have pierced;” that is, they who have occasioned his sufferings by their sins, (and who has not?) shall either look upon him in this world with penitential sorrow, or with terror when he cometh in the clouds of heaven, Revelation 1:7.

Ver. 32-37. Then came the soldiers, at three o’clock, the proper hour. — And he that saw bare record, and his record is true, concerning occurrences apparently casual, but which to the letter fulfilled the scriptures. What, Roman soldiers, ignorant of the scriptures, break the legs of the first thief, and then passing by the Saviour who was now dead, break the legs of the second thief, to fulfil the letter of the law concerning the paschal lamb, which enjoined that not a bone of it should be broken! Exodus 12:46. Equally remarkable is the piercing of the Redeemer’s side, whence issued “water and blood,” as in 1 John 5:8. By water is understood the serum of the pericardium, in which the heart swims, or rather is lubricated. Therefore the water would issue first, and the blood instantly follow. How exact is the narration of John. All was now finished: they looked on him whom they had pierced. Zechariah 12:10.

34. One of the soldiers—As if to make assurance doubly sure. Blood and water—It has been well known in all ages that the blood of a dead man forthwith coagulates and will not flow. So that the ancient Greek commentator, Euthymius, says: “From the body of a dead man, though it should be pierced ten thousand times, no blood would issue.” Hence the early Church held this blood-and-water stream from the side of Jesus to be miraculous. In our own day, also, Mr. Andrews, in his Life of our Lord, holds that as the body of Jesus miraculously suffered no corruption, so the live blood could follow the spear as from the body of a living man. So by divine provision the sacred body of Jesus must be preserved from being marred by stoning to death, according to Jewish law, or by the crucifragium, according to Roman custom. His body must attain its resurrection unviolated, save by those blood wounds without which there could be no remission. The furnishing a natural solution has greatly perplexed anatomists. In the opinion of Tholuck, Ebrard has brought the question to a satisfactory result. Ebrard professes to show that in certain cases of violent contortion the blood might be decomposed into two parts, might become unnaturally collected, be pierced by the spear, and both water and blood flow forth. Of all natural solutions, perhaps that of Stroud is best. He maintains that JESUS DIED OF A BROKEN HEART; and in such a case blood would escape into the region around the heart and there be separated into red clot and watery fluid; thence it would escape through the wound made by the spear. It is a wonderful thought that the mighty heart of Jesus broke under its crushing weight of woe; and it is a striking idea that the apostle’s simple observation should furnish the phenomenon from which modern science verifies such a result.

V. 35. His testimony is true-Valid, unexceptionable. And he knoweth-And his conscience beareth him witness, that he testifieth this for no other end, than that ye may believe.

Verse 35. He that saw it] Most probably John himself, who must have been pretty near the cross to have been able to distinguish between the blood and the water, as they issued from the side of our blessed Lord. And he knoweth] This appears to be an appeal to the Lord Jesus, for the truth of the testimony which he had now delivered. But why such a solemn appeal, unless there was something miraculous in this matter? It might appear to him necessary: 1. Because the other evangelists had not noticed it. 2. Because it contained the most decisive proof of the death of Christ: as a wound such as this was could not have been inflicted, (though other causes had been wanting,) without occasioning the death of the person; and on his dying for men depended the salvation of the world. And, 3. Because two important prophecies were fulfilled by this very circumstance, both of which designated more particularly the person of the Messiah. A bone of him shall not be broken, Exodus 12:46; Numbers 9:12; Psalm 34:20. They shall look upon him whom they pierced, Zechariah 12:10; Psalm 22:16.

Verses 31-37. That the bodies should not remain on the cross — It was customary among the Romans to let the bodies of persons who had been executed continue on the crosses, or stakes, till they were devoured by birds or beasts of prey. But the law of Moses expressly prohibited the Jews from suffering the bodies of those who were hanged to remain all night on the trees, Deuteronomy 21:22; for that reason, as well as because the sabbath was at hand, which would have been profaned by their remaining, especially as that sabbath was a day of peculiar solemnity, being the second day of the feast of unleavened bread, (from whence they reckoned the weeks to pentecost,) and also the day for presenting and offering the sheaf of new corn; therefore, the Jews besought Pilate that the legs of the three crucified persons might be broken, to hasten their death; and Pilate consented, and gave the order they desired. Then came the soldiers — Who guarded the execution; and brake the legs of the first — Malefactor, or of him that hung nearest the place where they had been sitting; and then, passing by Jesus, who hung in the middle, they went and brake the legs of the other, who was crucified with him. But when they came to Jesus, perceiving that he was dead already — They did not take the trouble of breaking his legs; but one of the soldiers — Had so much boldness and inhumanity that, with a spear, which he had in his hand, he pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water — Real blood and real water; the spear having pierced both the pericardium and heart, the water issuing from the former and the blood from the latter; a wound which must inevitably have killed him, had he been living when it was given, and which consequently put it out of all doubt that he was really dead, before he was taken down from the cross; a point of infinite importance to be ascertained. For the grand evidence of Christ’s mission is his resurrection, which implies the certainty of his death. On that account, crucifixion might have seemed, on a slight view, a less proper execution than some others, such as beheading, burning, and the like; but this wound, which pierced his heart, would effectually exclude all pretences of his having been taken down alive by his friends; and hence, false and malicious as his enemies were, we do not find that they ever had recourse to such an evasion. Accordingly, as it was of such importance to mankind to be ascertained of the truth of Christ’s death, the evangelist here, in speaking of it, attests this circumstance, which demonstrates it, as being a thing which he himself saw; saying, And he that saw it bare record, &c., and he knoweth — By the most certain testimony of his senses; that he saith true — And he makes this declaration that you, whoever you are, into whose hands this history may come, may believe — And may be confirmed in your adherence to that gospel which is established on the death and resurrection of Christ. Of the mystical meaning of the blood and water which issued out of the side of Christ, see the note on 1 John 5:6. For these things were done — Or were permitted to be done, in the course of divine providence, however inconsiderable they may appear, that the scripture should be fulfilled — That is, Jesus’s legs were not broken, that the passage, (Exodus 12:46,) Neither shall ye break a bone thereof, might be fulfilled. “These words were primarily spoken of the paschal lamb, whose bones were not to be broken, that it might be a fit representation of the Messiah, typified by this sacrifice; and who, though he was to suffer a violent death, was to have none of his bones broken, because he was to rise from the dead on the third day. Wherefore, as the scripture which speaks of the type has necessarily a reference to the antitype, the evangelist had good reason to interpret what is there said of the paschal lamb, as prophetical of this circumstance of our Lord’s death. And the rather, as by so doing he makes his readers sensible it was not owing to accident that the soldiers treated Christ’s body otherwise than they treated the bodies of those who were crucified with him. It happened by the direction of God, who had always determined that Christ should rise from the dead, and that his mission should be fully demonstrated by the evidence of miracles and prophecies united. John observes also, that Christ’s side was pierced with a spear, because another scripture (Zechariah 12:10) had said They shall look on him whom they have pierced;” that is, they who have occasioned his sufferings by their sins, (and who has not?) shall either look upon him in this world with penitential sorrow, or with terror when he cometh in the clouds of heaven, Revelation 1:7.

Ver. 32-37. Then came the soldiers, at three o’clock, the proper hour. — And he that saw bare record, and his record is true, concerning occurrences apparently casual, but which to the letter fulfilled the scriptures. What, Roman soldiers, ignorant of the scriptures, break the legs of the first thief, and then passing by the Saviour who was now dead, break the legs of the second thief, to fulfil the letter of the law concerning the paschal lamb, which enjoined that not a bone of it should be broken! Exodus 12:46. Equally remarkable is the piercing of the Redeemer’s side, whence issued “water and blood,” as in 1 John 5:8. By water is understood the serum of the pericardium, in which the heart swims, or rather is lubricated. Therefore the water would issue first, and the blood instantly follow. How exact is the narration of John. All was now finished: they looked on him whom they had pierced. Zechariah 12:10.

35. He that saw—The apostle, speaking of himself in the third person, and solemnly asseverating his own truth and accuracy. But what is the point which the Evangelist here designs so strongly to attest? Plainly the double fact by which the predictions in verses 36 and 37 are fulfilled: namely, the fact that no bone was broken, but that the side was pierced.

V. 36. A bone of it shall not be broken-This was originally spoken of the paschal lamb, an eminent type of Christ. Exodus 12:46.

Verses 31-37. That the bodies should not remain on the cross — It was customary among the Romans to let the bodies of persons who had been executed continue on the crosses, or stakes, till they were devoured by birds or beasts of prey. But the law of Moses expressly prohibited the Jews from suffering the bodies of those who were hanged to remain all night on the trees, Deuteronomy 21:22; for that reason, as well as because the sabbath was at hand, which would have been profaned by their remaining, especially as that sabbath was a day of peculiar solemnity, being the second day of the feast of unleavened bread, (from whence they reckoned the weeks to pentecost,) and also the day for presenting and offering the sheaf of new corn; therefore, the Jews besought Pilate that the legs of the three crucified persons might be broken, to hasten their death; and Pilate consented, and gave the order they desired. Then came the soldiers — Who guarded the execution; and brake the legs of the first — Malefactor, or of him that hung nearest the place where they had been sitting; and then, passing by Jesus, who hung in the middle, they went and brake the legs of the other, who was crucified with him. But when they came to Jesus, perceiving that he was dead already — They did not take the trouble of breaking his legs; but one of the soldiers — Had so much boldness and inhumanity that, with a spear, which he had in his hand, he pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water — Real blood and real water; the spear having pierced both the pericardium and heart, the water issuing from the former and the blood from the latter; a wound which must inevitably have killed him, had he been living when it was given, and which consequently put it out of all doubt that he was really dead, before he was taken down from the cross; a point of infinite importance to be ascertained. For the grand evidence of Christ’s mission is his resurrection, which implies the certainty of his death. On that account, crucifixion might have seemed, on a slight view, a less proper execution than some others, such as beheading, burning, and the like; but this wound, which pierced his heart, would effectually exclude all pretences of his having been taken down alive by his friends; and hence, false and malicious as his enemies were, we do not find that they ever had recourse to such an evasion. Accordingly, as it was of such importance to mankind to be ascertained of the truth of Christ’s death, the evangelist here, in speaking of it, attests this circumstance, which demonstrates it, as being a thing which he himself saw; saying, And he that saw it bare record, &c., and he knoweth — By the most certain testimony of his senses; that he saith true — And he makes this declaration that you, whoever you are, into whose hands this history may come, may believe — And may be confirmed in your adherence to that gospel which is established on the death and resurrection of Christ. Of the mystical meaning of the blood and water which issued out of the side of Christ, see the note on 1 John 5:6. For these things were done — Or were permitted to be done, in the course of divine providence, however inconsiderable they may appear, that the scripture should be fulfilled — That is, Jesus’s legs were not broken, that the passage, (Exodus 12:46,) Neither shall ye break a bone thereof, might be fulfilled. “These words were primarily spoken of the paschal lamb, whose bones were not to be broken, that it might be a fit representation of the Messiah, typified by this sacrifice; and who, though he was to suffer a violent death, was to have none of his bones broken, because he was to rise from the dead on the third day. Wherefore, as the scripture which speaks of the type has necessarily a reference to the antitype, the evangelist had good reason to interpret what is there said of the paschal lamb, as prophetical of this circumstance of our Lord’s death. And the rather, as by so doing he makes his readers sensible it was not owing to accident that the soldiers treated Christ’s body otherwise than they treated the bodies of those who were crucified with him. It happened by the direction of God, who had always determined that Christ should rise from the dead, and that his mission should be fully demonstrated by the evidence of miracles and prophecies united. John observes also, that Christ’s side was pierced with a spear, because another scripture (Zechariah 12:10) had said They shall look on him whom they have pierced;” that is, they who have occasioned his sufferings by their sins, (and who has not?) shall either look upon him in this world with penitential sorrow, or with terror when he cometh in the clouds of heaven, Revelation 1:7.

Ver. 32-37. Then came the soldiers, at three o’clock, the proper hour. — And he that saw bare record, and his record is true, concerning occurrences apparently casual, but which to the letter fulfilled the scriptures. What, Roman soldiers, ignorant of the scriptures, break the legs of the first thief, and then passing by the Saviour who was now dead, break the legs of the second thief, to fulfil the letter of the law concerning the paschal lamb, which enjoined that not a bone of it should be broken! Exodus 12:46. Equally remarkable is the piercing of the Redeemer’s side, whence issued “water and blood,” as in 1 John 5:8. By water is understood the serum of the pericardium, in which the heart swims, or rather is lubricated. Therefore the water would issue first, and the blood instantly follow. How exact is the narration of John. All was now finished: they looked on him whom they had pierced. Zechariah 12:10.

36. A bone… not be broken—John quotes these words with but slight verbal variation from Exodus 12:46, and Numbers 9:12. In those passages it is the Passover lamb to which the words apply. In John’s view, therefore, Christ himself is the paschal victim, so that the words must be true of him. In other words, the Passover lamb is a predictive emblem of the Redeemer. So Paul affirms (1 Corinthians 5:7) Christ, our Passover, (or paschal victim,) is slain for us. That it was a substitutive victim is plain from the facts of the original institution of the Passover. Israel was as true a sinner as Egypt; but for Israel the paschal victim died instead. And as, when the destroying angel saw the paschal blood he passed over unharming, so when divine justice beholds in our behalf the atoning blood, it spares our souls. As the paschal victim by its blood redeemed Israel from Egypt and transmitted them to Canaan, so Christ’s atoning blood delivers us from the bonds of sin and furnishes our passport to the heavenly land. And this paschal lamb was to be without blemish, was to be eaten entire, without the breaking of a single bone. And this is the physical symbol of that perfectness, completeness, and sacredness belonging to the Redeemer’s person. So in our Saxon-English dialect the word holiness is but a different form of the word wholeness. Corporeally, our Saviour’s person was so divinely guarded, that except those scourgings and wounds prefigured by the slaughter of the emblematic victims of sacrifice, no harm could mar him. In his body must therefore be fulfilled the requirement laid upon the paschal lamb; not a bone of him shall be broken. This bodily inviolable wholeness, belonging both to the emblematic and real victims, must, moreover, be taken with all the momentous import it contains. Christ’s whole nature is perfect before God and man; hence is he acceptable to God completely and perfectly; and hence should he be accepted by man in all the same completeness and perfectness. Thereby we aspire to the same perfection; and thereby, becoming the very body of Christ, we finally attain its own perfectness, and become acceptable once and forever before God the Father Almighty.

V. 37. They shall look on him whom they have pierced-He was pierced by the soldier's spear. They who have occasioned his sufferings by their sins (and who has not?) shall either look upon him in this world with penitential sorrow: or with terror, when he cometh in the clouds of heaven, Revelation 1:7. Zechariah 12:10.

Verses 31-37. That the bodies should not remain on the cross — It was customary among the Romans to let the bodies of persons who had been executed continue on the crosses, or stakes, till they were devoured by birds or beasts of prey. But the law of Moses expressly prohibited the Jews from suffering the bodies of those who were hanged to remain all night on the trees, Deuteronomy 21:22; for that reason, as well as because the sabbath was at hand, which would have been profaned by their remaining, especially as that sabbath was a day of peculiar solemnity, being the second day of the feast of unleavened bread, (from whence they reckoned the weeks to pentecost,) and also the day for presenting and offering the sheaf of new corn; therefore, the Jews besought Pilate that the legs of the three crucified persons might be broken, to hasten their death; and Pilate consented, and gave the order they desired. Then came the soldiers — Who guarded the execution; and brake the legs of the first — Malefactor, or of him that hung nearest the place where they had been sitting; and then, passing by Jesus, who hung in the middle, they went and brake the legs of the other, who was crucified with him. But when they came to Jesus, perceiving that he was dead already — They did not take the trouble of breaking his legs; but one of the soldiers — Had so much boldness and inhumanity that, with a spear, which he had in his hand, he pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water — Real blood and real water; the spear having pierced both the pericardium and heart, the water issuing from the former and the blood from the latter; a wound which must inevitably have killed him, had he been living when it was given, and which consequently put it out of all doubt that he was really dead, before he was taken down from the cross; a point of infinite importance to be ascertained. For the grand evidence of Christ’s mission is his resurrection, which implies the certainty of his death. On that account, crucifixion might have seemed, on a slight view, a less proper execution than some others, such as beheading, burning, and the like; but this wound, which pierced his heart, would effectually exclude all pretences of his having been taken down alive by his friends; and hence, false and malicious as his enemies were, we do not find that they ever had recourse to such an evasion. Accordingly, as it was of such importance to mankind to be ascertained of the truth of Christ’s death, the evangelist here, in speaking of it, attests this circumstance, which demonstrates it, as being a thing which he himself saw; saying, And he that saw it bare record, &c., and he knoweth — By the most certain testimony of his senses; that he saith true — And he makes this declaration that you, whoever you are, into whose hands this history may come, may believe — And may be confirmed in your adherence to that gospel which is established on the death and resurrection of Christ. Of the mystical meaning of the blood and water which issued out of the side of Christ, see the note on 1 John 5:6. For these things were done — Or were permitted to be done, in the course of divine providence, however inconsiderable they may appear, that the scripture should be fulfilled — That is, Jesus’s legs were not broken, that the passage, (Exodus 12:46,) Neither shall ye break a bone thereof, might be fulfilled. “These words were primarily spoken of the paschal lamb, whose bones were not to be broken, that it might be a fit representation of the Messiah, typified by this sacrifice; and who, though he was to suffer a violent death, was to have none of his bones broken, because he was to rise from the dead on the third day. Wherefore, as the scripture which speaks of the type has necessarily a reference to the antitype, the evangelist had good reason to interpret what is there said of the paschal lamb, as prophetical of this circumstance of our Lord’s death. And the rather, as by so doing he makes his readers sensible it was not owing to accident that the soldiers treated Christ’s body otherwise than they treated the bodies of those who were crucified with him. It happened by the direction of God, who had always determined that Christ should rise from the dead, and that his mission should be fully demonstrated by the evidence of miracles and prophecies united. John observes also, that Christ’s side was pierced with a spear, because another scripture (Zechariah 12:10) had said They shall look on him whom they have pierced;” that is, they who have occasioned his sufferings by their sins, (and who has not?) shall either look upon him in this world with penitential sorrow, or with terror when he cometh in the clouds of heaven, Revelation 1:7.

Ver. 32-37. Then came the soldiers, at three o’clock, the proper hour. — And he that saw bare record, and his record is true, concerning occurrences apparently casual, but which to the letter fulfilled the scriptures. What, Roman soldiers, ignorant of the scriptures, break the legs of the first thief, and then passing by the Saviour who was now dead, break the legs of the second thief, to fulfil the letter of the law concerning the paschal lamb, which enjoined that not a bone of it should be broken! Exodus 12:46. Equally remarkable is the piercing of the Redeemer’s side, whence issued “water and blood,” as in 1 John 5:8. By water is understood the serum of the pericardium, in which the heart swims, or rather is lubricated. Therefore the water would issue first, and the blood instantly follow. How exact is the narration of John. All was now finished: they looked on him whom they had pierced. Zechariah 12:10.

37. Whom they pierced—The quotation is from Zechariah 12:10, with which compare Psalm 22:16: They pierced my hands and my feet. According to the prophet, God should pour upon the house of David (who in the Psalm quoted personates the pierced Messiah) the spirit of penitence, by which they should look with weeping upon the pierced One, and mourn as for an only Son, by them slaughtered. In this bodily piercing John sees a physical fulfilment of the prophetic physical image. It impressed his senses as he gazed. It was by inspired after-thought that he fully realized the Scripture verification. The visible image here too embodies its world of import. John saw the soldier look upon him whom his spear had pierced. So every penitent Jew of John’s time looked upon the pierced and crucified Messiah and repented. In the fulness of time all Israel shall look upon him whom they have pierced, and repent; and all men whose sins have been the spear that pierced his side, have just reason to look upon him and repentantly mourn, as over a son their sins have murdered. This leaving his bones unbroken, yet piercing his side, exhibited to John both the divine preservation and the sacrificial execution of the Lamb of God. Had Jesus been executed by Hebrew law his body must have been mutilated and crushed by stoning; so that, strange to say, the old Hebrew prophecy had to wait for the Roman to come, and in a mode his laws had prescribed, to sacrifice the Son of David according to the Scriptures. No wonder that John asseverates so solemnly that he saw it with his own marvelling bodily eyes.

The friends of Jesus, and his entombment, 38-42.

V. 38. Joseph of Arimathea asked Pilate-And Nicodemus also came-Acknowledging Christ, when even his chosen disciples forsook him. In that extremity Joseph was no longer afraid, Nicodemus no longer ashamed.

Verse 38. Joseph of Arimathea] See on Matthew 27:57-60; and particularly Mark 15:42, 43.

Verses 38, 39. Joseph of Arimathea, being a disciple of Jesus, but secretly — Because he durst not openly profess his faith in him; for fear of the Jews — And their rulers, who were so strongly prejudiced against him. This man, acknowledging Christ even when his chosen disciples forsook him, besought Pilate that he might take away the body — To preserve it from future insults, and to bury it in a decent and respectful manner. And Pilate gave him leave — As soon as he was assured by the centurion who guarded the execution that Jesus was actually dead. He came, therefore — Being thus authorized by Pilate; and took the body of Jesus — That is, took it down from the cross, with proper assistance. And there came also Nicodemus — Another member of the sanhedrim, of whom repeated mention has been made in the preceding narrative; who at the first — At the beginning of Christ’s public ministry; came to Jesus by night — See John 3:1, 2; and being now grown more courageous than before, and to testify his great regard for Jesus, he brought with him a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about a hundred pounds weight — According to Josephus, great quantities of spices were wont to be used by the Jews for embalming a dead body, when they intended to show marks of respect to the deceased. Eighty pounds of spices were used at the funeral of Gamaliel the elder. See notes on Matthew 27:57-60; Mark 15:42-46.

38. After this Joseph of Arimathea—The foes have gone into the background, and Jesus is now with his friends for evermore. No apostle appears present at the embalmment or entombment; but one whose name is hitherto unmentioned, and would be forever unmentioned, but for this act, steps forward. So for the just man Providence ever raises new friends. And so may the weakest faith grow strong and take its proper post at the required hour. See note on Matthew 27:57-61.

Verse 39. Nicodemus] See Clarke on “John 3:1”, &c. Myrrh and aloes] Which drugs were used to preserve bodies from putrefaction. Calmet says that the aloes mentioned here is a liquor which runs from an aromatic tree, and is widely different from that called aloes among us.

Some have objected that a hundred pounds’ weight of myrrh and aloes was enough to embalm two hundred dead bodies; and instead of ekaton, a hundred, some critics have proposed to read ekaterwn-a mixture of myrrh and aloes, of about a pound EACH. See Bowyer’s Conjectures. But it may be observed that great quantities of spices were used for embalming dead bodies, when they intended to show peculiar marks of respect to the deceased. A great quantity was used at the funeral of Aristobulus; and it is said that five hundred servants bearing aromatics attended the funeral of Herod: see Josephus, Ant. b. xv. c. 3, s. 4; and b. xvii. c. 8, s. 3: and fourscore pounds of spices were used at the funeral of R. Gamaliel the elder. See Wetstein in loc.

Verses 38, 39. Joseph of Arimathea, being a disciple of Jesus, but secretly — Because he durst not openly profess his faith in him; for fear of the Jews — And their rulers, who were so strongly prejudiced against him. This man, acknowledging Christ even when his chosen disciples forsook him, besought Pilate that he might take away the body — To preserve it from future insults, and to bury it in a decent and respectful manner. And Pilate gave him leave — As soon as he was assured by the centurion who guarded the execution that Jesus was actually dead. He came, therefore — Being thus authorized by Pilate; and took the body of Jesus — That is, took it down from the cross, with proper assistance. And there came also Nicodemus — Another member of the sanhedrim, of whom repeated mention has been made in the preceding narrative; who at the first — At the beginning of Christ’s public ministry; came to Jesus by night — See John 3:1, 2; and being now grown more courageous than before, and to testify his great regard for Jesus, he brought with him a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about a hundred pounds weight — According to Josephus, great quantities of spices were wont to be used by the Jews for embalming a dead body, when they intended to show marks of respect to the deceased. Eighty pounds of spices were used at the funeral of Gamaliel the elder. See notes on Matthew 27:57-60; Mark 15:42-46.

39. Also Nicodemus—Mentioned by John alone. See notes on John 3:1-21, and John 7:50-53. Myrrh—This myrrh is a gum exuding from a tree found in Arabia and more plentifully in Abyssinia. It was a very ancient article of commerce among Egyptians, Jews, Greeks, and Romans. It is first mentioned in Exodus 30:23. It was celebrated in ancient times as a perfume, and burned for an agreeable fumigation; it was esteemed as a medicine. It was an ingredient in the ancient Egyptian embalmment. In the middle ages of Europe it was held that it would render a man’s body immortal, if there were any method of completely imbuing the system with it. Aloes—The article here mentioned is not to be identified with the drug which bears that name in the modern Materia Medica, which is a very bitter and somewhat stimulant stomachic purgative; on the contrary, the article here named is an odoriferous wood, celebrated for its agreeable qualities in ancient literature. Thus in Psalm 45:8: “All thy garments smell of myrrh, and aloes, and cassia.” The Hebrew word ahil became identified, both in the Greek and modern languages, with the word aloes simply from the verbal resemblance. It is curious that the Malay name of the article is agila; which, besides bearing a strong resemblance to the Hebrew word, has also a resemblance to the word eagle; and hence the same article has received the name of eagle-wood. A hundred pounds—Probably in the form of a ground or pulverized grain. Sceptical critics have raised a great outcry at the enormous amount of embalmment here mentioned. Its weight is almost equal to that of the body to be embalmed. But it is probable that St. John knew quite as well as any modern caviller whether this amount was incredibly large. Certain it is that the amount of spices bestowed was anciently considered an honour to the person entombed. Thus, when Rabbi Gamaliel, senior, died, it is said that there was burned by one proselyte more than eighty pounds of Oppo balsam. Might not Nicodemus esteem this “Teacher sent from God” above all rabbis, priests, or prophets? Might he not have dealt his spices in proportion to his estimation? Do we know that all this material was used in the first enwrapment of the body? (See note on Matthew 27:59.) Might not a large amount have been reserved for a fragrant fumigation of the apartments of the sepulchre? Besides, we have already intimated, that probably this great amount of embalming material may have been furnished under some vague idea that the body of Jesus was to be preserved from corruption, and that human means might contribute to that effect. And when we note that the women also prepared spices on Friday evening, (Luke 23:56,) and others brought spices on Sunday morning, (Mark 16:1,) we plainly see that each, without regard to the others’ contributions, was anxious to furnish a share as a tribute of love. To the cavils of Strauss the reply of Ebrard is both beautiful and conclusive: “As if when flowers were to be strewn on the grave of a dear departed friend any one would now ask the question, How many were required? so that there might be just enough! If a friend sent unexpectedly a bunch of flowers, would the mourner, glad to save his money, say, Now there are sufficient flowers; I do not need to buy any more?”

Verse 40. Wound it in linen] See Clarke on “John 11:34”.

Verse 40. Then — To prepare for his interment; they took the body of Jesus — Without regarding the reproach to which it might expose them; and wound it in linen clothes — Wrapped it in a great many folds of linen; with the spices, as the manner of the Jews is to bury — Or rather, to embalm, for the proper meaning of the verb entafiazein, here used, is not to bury, but to embalm, as Dr. Campbell proves in a note on the words; showing that the verb entafiazein, and the noun entafiasmov, are used in the New Testament only in relation to the embalming of the body of our Lord; the word used for to bury, being invariably qaptein, which accords perfectly with the use made of the same words by the LXX. See Genesis 50:2, 5, where the import of both words, and the distinction between them, is exemplified. It seems Joseph and Nicodemus intended to embalm our Lord’s body in a more exact manner as soon as the sabbath was over; hoping that, in the mean time, the spices lying near the body might preserve it from all taint of corruption. “Those who have written upon the manners and customs of the Jews tell us, that they sometimes embalmed their dead with an aromatic mixture of myrrh, aloes, and other gums or spices, which they rubbed on the body, more or less profusely, according to their circumstances and their regard for the dead. After anointing the body, they covered it with a shroud, or winding-sheet, then wrapped a napkin round its head and face, others say, round the forehead only; because the Egyptian mummies are observed to have it so; last of all, they swathed the shroud round the body as tightly as possible, with proper bandages made of linen. At other times, they covered the whole body in a heap of spices, as is said of Asa, 2 Chronicles 16:14. From the quantity of myrrh and aloes made use of by Joseph and Nicodemus, it would appear that the office performed by them to their Master was of this latter kind; for they had not time to embalm him properly.” They seem, however, to have done all that was usual in such circumstances to persons of wealth and distinction, which, as well as the sepulchre itself, agreed to Isaiah’s prophecy, Isaiah 53:9.

40. Then took they—In the last two verses John has mentioned Joseph and Nicodemus each in the singular, and then adds the part which each performed: the former secured the body, the latter furnished the embalmment for it. Now in the plural they both cooperate in the same work. Heretofore they may have been strangers; ever after doubtless they were brethren.

V. 41. In the place where he was crucified-There was a garden in the same tract of land: but the cross did not stand in the garden.

Verse 41. There was a garden] It was an ancient custom for particular families to have burying places in their gardens. See 2 Kings 21:18, 26. New sepulchre] See Clarke on “Matthew 27:60”.

Verses 41, 42. Now in the place where he was crucified — In the same tract of land; there was a garden — But the cross did not stand in the garden; and in the garden a sepulchre — Which happened very commodiously for his immediate interment. By the circumstance of the sepulchre’s being “nigh to the place where Jesus was crucified, and consequently nigh to Jerusalem, all the cavils are prevented, which might otherwise have been occasioned, in case the body had been removed farther off. Moreover, it is observed that the sepulchre was a new one, wherein never any man had been laid. This plainly proves that it could be no other than Jesus who arose; and cuts off all suspicion that he was raised by touching the bones of some prophet who had been buried there, as happened to the corpse which touched the bones of Elisha, 2 Kings 13:21. Further, the evangelists take notice that it was a sepulchre hewn out of a rock, to show that there was no passage by which the disciples could get into it, but the one at which the guards were placed, Matthew 27:60; and, consequently, that it was not in their power to steal away the body, while the guards remained there performing their duty.” — Macknight. There laid they Jesus, because of the Jews’ preparation — That is, they chose the rather to lay him in that sepulchre, which was nigh, because it was the day before the sabbath, which also was drawing to an end, so they had no time to carry him far. “The boldness of Joseph, and even of Nicodemus himself, deserves our notice on such an occasion. They are not ashamed of the infamy of the cross, but come with all holy reverence and affection to take down those sacred remains of Jesus; nor did they think the finest linen or the choicest spices too valuable on such an occasion. But who can describe their consternation and distress, when they saw him who they trusted should have delivered Israel, a cold and bloody corpse in their arms; and left him in the sepulchre of Joseph, whom they expected to have seen on the throne of David. We leave, for the present, his enemies in triumph, and his friends in tears, till his resurrection; which soon confounded the rage of the former, and revived the hopes of the latter; — hopes which must otherwise have been for ever entombed under that stone with which they now covered him. But happy and comfortable is the thought, that this his transient visit to the grave has (as it were) left a perfume in the bed of dust, and reconciled the believer to dwelling a while in the place where the Lord lay.” — Doddridge.

41. In the garden a new sepulchre—John’s account here, had we no other, would appear not a little mysterious. By what right do the friends of this supposed malefactor take possession of the nearest new sepulchre? But from Matthew we learn (Matthew 27:60) that it is Joseph’s own new tomb. We have thus one of those happy but undesigned coincidences which show that truth is the basis of the account. As the next verse shows, the time required haste, and the body was deposited in this sepulchre temporarily, in order, after the sabbath was passed, to give it an honourable tomb in the proper burial ground.

V. 42. Because of the preparation-That is, they chose the rather to lay him in that sepulchre which was nigh, because it was the day before the Sabbath, which also was drawing to an end, so that they had no time to carry him far.

Verse 42. Because of the Jews’ preparation] From this it may be conjectured that they had designed to have put him in a more magnificent tomb; or, that they intended to make one expressly for himself after the passover: or, that they had designed to have put him somewhere else, but could not do it for want of time; and that they put him here because the tomb was nigh. It appears plainly, from embalming, &c., that none of these persons had any hope of the resurrection of Christ. They considered him as a great and eminent prophet, and treated him as such.

1. IN the burial of our Lord, a remarkable prophecy was fulfilled: His death was appointed with the wicked; and with a rich man was his tomb. See Lowth on Isaiah 53:9. Every thing attending his mock trial, his passion, his death, his burial, &c., afforded the fullest proof of his innocence. In still continuing to reject him, the Jews seem to have exceeded the ordinary bounds of incredulity and callousness of heart. One might imagine that a candid attention to the Gospel facts, collated with those passages in the law and in the prophets which they acknowledge to speak of the Messiah, would be sufficient to furnish them with the utmost evidence and fullest conviction that he is the Christ, and that they are to expect none other. But where people once make a covenant with unbelief, argument, reason, demonstration, and miracles themselves, fail to convince them. As their conviction, through this obstinacy, is rendered impossible, it belongs to God’s justice to confound them. At present they have scarcely any correct knowledge of the true God; and, while they continue to reject the genuine faith, they are capable of crediting the most degrading absurdities.

2. The holy sepulchre, or what has long passed for the burial place of our Lord, is now no more! On the following information the reader may depend: “On the night of October 11, 1808, the Church of the Holy Sepulchre was discovered to be on fire; and between five and six in the morning the burning cupola, with all the melting and boiling lead upon it, fell in. The excessive heat which proceeded from this immense mass of liquid fire, caused not only the marble columns, which supported the gallery, to burst; but likewise the marble floor of the Church, together with the pilasters and images in bas relief that decorate the chapel, containing the holy sepulchre, situated in the centre of the church. Shortly after, the massive columns which supported the gallery, fell down, together with the whole of the walls.” Thus has perished the famous church raised by the Empress Helena fourteen hundred years ago, over the place where the body of our blessed Lord was supposed to have been deposited, while he lay under the power of death. And thus has perished an engine of superstition, fraud, and imposture. To the most sinful purposes has this holy sepulchre been abused. The Greeks and Armenians have pretended that, on every Easter-eve, fire descends from heaven, and kindles all the lamps and candles in the place; and immense crowds of pilgrims frequent this place, on these occasions, in order to witness this ceremony, to light a taper at this sacred flame, and with these candles to singe and daub pieces of linen, which are afterwards to serve for winding sheets; for, says Mr. Maundrell, who was present, April 3rd, 1697, and witnessed the whole of this absurd and abominable ceremony, “it is the opinion of these poor people that, if they can but have the happiness to be buried in a shroud smutted with this celestial fire, it will certainly secure them from the flames of hell.”

See the whole of his circumstantial account of this imposture, and the ridiculous and abominable ceremonies with which it is accompanied, in his Journey from Aleppo to Jerusalem, edit. 5th, pp. 94-97; and let the reader thank God that he is not degraded with a superstition that renders the grace of the Gospel of none effect.

ST. JOHN

Verses 41, 42. Now in the place where he was crucified — In the same tract of land; there was a garden — But the cross did not stand in the garden; and in the garden a sepulchre — Which happened very commodiously for his immediate interment. By the circumstance of the sepulchre’s being “nigh to the place where Jesus was crucified, and consequently nigh to Jerusalem, all the cavils are prevented, which might otherwise have been occasioned, in case the body had been removed farther off. Moreover, it is observed that the sepulchre was a new one, wherein never any man had been laid. This plainly proves that it could be no other than Jesus who arose; and cuts off all suspicion that he was raised by touching the bones of some prophet who had been buried there, as happened to the corpse which touched the bones of Elisha, 2 Kings 13:21. Further, the evangelists take notice that it was a sepulchre hewn out of a rock, to show that there was no passage by which the disciples could get into it, but the one at which the guards were placed, Matthew 27:60; and, consequently, that it was not in their power to steal away the body, while the guards remained there performing their duty.” — Macknight. There laid they Jesus, because of the Jews’ preparation — That is, they chose the rather to lay him in that sepulchre, which was nigh, because it was the day before the sabbath, which also was drawing to an end, so they had no time to carry him far. “The boldness of Joseph, and even of Nicodemus himself, deserves our notice on such an occasion. They are not ashamed of the infamy of the cross, but come with all holy reverence and affection to take down those sacred remains of Jesus; nor did they think the finest linen or the choicest spices too valuable on such an occasion. But who can describe their consternation and distress, when they saw him who they trusted should have delivered Israel, a cold and bloody corpse in their arms; and left him in the sepulchre of Joseph, whom they expected to have seen on the throne of David. We leave, for the present, his enemies in triumph, and his friends in tears, till his resurrection; which soon confounded the rage of the former, and revived the hopes of the latter; — hopes which must otherwise have been for ever entombed under that stone with which they now covered him. But happy and comfortable is the thought, that this his transient visit to the grave has (as it were) left a perfume in the bed of dust, and reconciled the believer to dwelling a while in the place where the Lord lay.” — Doddridge.

§ 142.—THE TRANSACTIONS OF JESUS’S DEATH AND ENTOMBMENT, 31-42.

31. Bodies should not remain—By the more barbarous Roman custom the bodies of the malefactors could remain upon the cross until disintegrated by corruption or devoured by birds. But by the Mosaic law (Deuteronomy 21:23) they must be removed and buried before nightfall. The Jewish rulers doubtless desired that the corpse of Jesus should be as soon as possible removed from public sight. A high day—The Jewish Saturday-Sabbath after the crucifixion-Friday, being both the sabbath and a Passover day, was a great day. Legs might be broken—The crucifragium or leg-breaking was a Roman custom in cases of crucifixion, performed upon the malefactor before he was taken from the cross. The fracture was inflicted with an iron mallet upon the instep or ankle. This would leave the weight of the body to be sustained by the hands and upper parts, and cause exquisite agony to the victim not already beyond the reach of pain.