Luke · Chapter 22

V. 1. Matthew 26:1; Mark 14:1.

Verse 1. The feast of unleavened bread, &c.] See this largely explained, Exodus 23:14; Leviticus 23:2-40, and on Matthew 26:2.

Verses 1-6. Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh — Being to be celebrated within two days after our Lord had delivered the prophecies and admonitions recorded above. Concerning this feast, see on Matthew 26:2. The chief priests and scribes sought how they might kill him — See on Matthew 26:3-5. But they feared the people — Lest, if they seized him openly, a tumult should be raised among them, either to rescue him out of their hands, or to avenge his death. Then entered Satan — For he is never wanting to assist those whose hearts are bent upon mischief; into Judas — Being one of the twelve. This was a circumstance of such high aggravation, that it is observable each of the evangelists has marked it out in this view. See on Matthew 26:14-16, and Mark 14:10. He went — He went from Christ and his company, who were at Bethany, in the house of Simon, to the house of Caiaphas, the high-priest, whom he knew to be a most inveterate enemy to his Master, and having found means of introducing himself, and communicating his general design, communed, or conversed, with the chief priests and captains — Called captains of the temple, verse 52. They were Jewish officers, who presided over the guards which kept watch every night in the temple. The result of their communing is not mentioned, only by the sequel it appears, that he informed the priests of the place where his Master used to spend the nights, and undertook to conduct a band of armed men thither, who, in the absence of the multitude, might easily take him. And, because none of them were so well acquainted with Jesus as to be able to distinguish him from his disciples, in the darkness of the night, he agreed to point him out to them by kissing him. And they were glad — When they heard his proposal, they thought it very practicable, and rejoiced at so unexpected an offer from one of his disciples, to facilitate their measures. And covenanted to give him money — As a reward for that service. See on Matthew 26:4-16. And he promised — To attend particularly to the affair; and sought opportunity to betray him — To put him into their hands in as private a manner as possible; in the absence of the multitude — That, knowing nothing of what was done, they might not raise a tumult, and rescue him out of the hands of those that seized him.

Verse 1. The feast of unleavened bread drew nigh. See Matthew 26:2,

Verse 2. They feared the people.] The great mass of the people seem to have been convinced that Christ was at least a prophet sent from God; and it is likely they kept steady in their attachment to him. The multitude, who are represented as clamouring for his blood at the crucifixion, appear to have been a mere mob, formed out of the creatures of the chief priests and Pharisees.

Verses 1-6. Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh — Being to be celebrated within two days after our Lord had delivered the prophecies and admonitions recorded above. Concerning this feast, see on Matthew 26:2. The chief priests and scribes sought how they might kill him — See on Matthew 26:3-5. But they feared the people — Lest, if they seized him openly, a tumult should be raised among them, either to rescue him out of their hands, or to avenge his death. Then entered Satan — For he is never wanting to assist those whose hearts are bent upon mischief; into Judas — Being one of the twelve. This was a circumstance of such high aggravation, that it is observable each of the evangelists has marked it out in this view. See on Matthew 26:14-16, and Mark 14:10. He went — He went from Christ and his company, who were at Bethany, in the house of Simon, to the house of Caiaphas, the high-priest, whom he knew to be a most inveterate enemy to his Master, and having found means of introducing himself, and communicating his general design, communed, or conversed, with the chief priests and captains — Called captains of the temple, verse 52. They were Jewish officers, who presided over the guards which kept watch every night in the temple. The result of their communing is not mentioned, only by the sequel it appears, that he informed the priests of the place where his Master used to spend the nights, and undertook to conduct a band of armed men thither, who, in the absence of the multitude, might easily take him. And, because none of them were so well acquainted with Jesus as to be able to distinguish him from his disciples, in the darkness of the night, he agreed to point him out to them by kissing him. And they were glad — When they heard his proposal, they thought it very practicable, and rejoiced at so unexpected an offer from one of his disciples, to facilitate their measures. And covenanted to give him money — As a reward for that service. See on Matthew 26:4-16. And he promised — To attend particularly to the affair; and sought opportunity to betray him — To put him into their hands in as private a manner as possible; in the absence of the multitude — That, knowing nothing of what was done, they might not raise a tumult, and rescue him out of the hands of those that seized him.

V. 3. Then entered Satan-Who is never wanting to assist those whose heart is bent upon mischief.

Verse 3. Then entered Satan into Judas] The devil filled the heart of Judas with avarice; and that infamous passion led him to commit the crime here specified. This at once accounts for the whole of this most unprincipled and unnatural transaction. None but a devil, or he who is possessed by one, could have been guilty of it:-let the living lay this to heart. A minister of the Gospel, who is a lover of money, is constantly betraying the interests of Christ. He cannot serve two masters; and while his heart is possessed with the love of pelf, the love of God and zeal for perishing souls cannot dwell in him. What Satan could not do by the envy and malice of the high priests and Pharisees, he effects by Judas, a false and fallen minister of the Gospel of God. None are so dangerous to the interests of Christianity as persons of this stamp.

Verses 1-6. Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh — Being to be celebrated within two days after our Lord had delivered the prophecies and admonitions recorded above. Concerning this feast, see on Matthew 26:2. The chief priests and scribes sought how they might kill him — See on Matthew 26:3-5. But they feared the people — Lest, if they seized him openly, a tumult should be raised among them, either to rescue him out of their hands, or to avenge his death. Then entered Satan — For he is never wanting to assist those whose hearts are bent upon mischief; into Judas — Being one of the twelve. This was a circumstance of such high aggravation, that it is observable each of the evangelists has marked it out in this view. See on Matthew 26:14-16, and Mark 14:10. He went — He went from Christ and his company, who were at Bethany, in the house of Simon, to the house of Caiaphas, the high-priest, whom he knew to be a most inveterate enemy to his Master, and having found means of introducing himself, and communicating his general design, communed, or conversed, with the chief priests and captains — Called captains of the temple, verse 52. They were Jewish officers, who presided over the guards which kept watch every night in the temple. The result of their communing is not mentioned, only by the sequel it appears, that he informed the priests of the place where his Master used to spend the nights, and undertook to conduct a band of armed men thither, who, in the absence of the multitude, might easily take him. And, because none of them were so well acquainted with Jesus as to be able to distinguish him from his disciples, in the darkness of the night, he agreed to point him out to them by kissing him. And they were glad — When they heard his proposal, they thought it very practicable, and rejoiced at so unexpected an offer from one of his disciples, to facilitate their measures. And covenanted to give him money — As a reward for that service. See on Matthew 26:4-16. And he promised — To attend particularly to the affair; and sought opportunity to betray him — To put him into their hands in as private a manner as possible; in the absence of the multitude — That, knowing nothing of what was done, they might not raise a tumult, and rescue him out of the hands of those that seized him.

3.

Ver. 3. Then Satan entered into Judas, by divine permission, his reigning sin of covetousness having proved his destruction. Judas after that was Satan’s instrument.

3. Then entered Satan into Judas—After the supper at Bethany, as narrated by the other evangelists, at which the provocation produced a diabolical excitement in Judas’s mind. This entering of Satan into him is not to be interpreted as an actual possession, but as a filling his whole soul, by Satan, with his devilish spirit and purpose. Surnamed Iscariot—See note on Matthew 10:4. The town of Kerioth, from which Judas seems to be named, is mentioned in Joshua 15:25. Dr. Hackett identifies it with Khureitun, “a few miles south of Bethlehem.” “A dark spirit would find its own element in the gloomy scenery of Khureitun.” Of the twelve—A fact which both rendered the crime possible and aggravated its guilt. At the present time none but an apostle could have surrendered Jesus; for so great was his present influence with the people that the authorities needed to have it done in the absence of the multitude.

PERIOD EIGHTH.

THE SUFFERING, Luke 22:7-23:56.

§ 121. JESUS PREPARES TO KEEP THE PASSOVER, 7-13.

Compare notes on Matthew 26:17-19; Mark 14:12-16.

V. 4. Captains-Called captains of the temple, Luke 22:52. They were Jewish officers, who presided over the guards which kept watch every night in the temple.

Verse 4. And captains] Among the priests who were in waiting at the temple, some were appointed fulakev, for a guard to the temple; and over these were strathgoi commanding officers: both sorts are mentioned by Josephus, War, b. vi. c. 5. s. 3. Bp. PEARCE, See another sense of captains, in Clarke’s note on “Matthew 27:65”. Dr. Lightfoot supposes these to have been the captains over the watches; for in three places the priests kept watch and ward in the temple, viz. in Beth Abtenes, in Beth Nitsots, and in Beth Mokad. The Levites also in twenty-one places more, Middoth, chap. i. Though these watches consisted of several persons in each, there was one set over them, as the captain or head of that watch. He thinks that Matthew, Matthew 27:65, refers to one of these: Ye have a watch of your own; let some of them be sent to guard the sepulchre. The captain of the temple, he supposes to have been the chief or head of all these watches; and thus he was captain of the captains. In the same Talmudical tract it is said, The ruler of the mountain of the temple (i.e. captain of the temple) takes his walks through every watch with torches lighted before him: if he found any upon the watch, that was not standing on his feet, he said, Peace be with thee: but if he found him sleeping, he struck him with a stick, and he might also burn his clothes. And when it was said by others, What noise is that in the court? the answer was, It is the noise of a Levite under correction, whose garments they are burning, because he slept upon his watch. This custom casts light on Revelation 16:15: Behold, I come as a thief: blessed is he that watcheth, and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked, and they see his shame. It is easy to distinguish this captain of the mountain of the temple from the ruler of the temple, or sagan: the former presided over the guards; the latter over the whole service of the temple. We have them both distinguished, Acts 4:1: there is the captain of the temple; and Annas, who was the sagan. See Lightfoot.

Verses 1-6. Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh — Being to be celebrated within two days after our Lord had delivered the prophecies and admonitions recorded above. Concerning this feast, see on Matthew 26:2. The chief priests and scribes sought how they might kill him — See on Matthew 26:3-5. But they feared the people — Lest, if they seized him openly, a tumult should be raised among them, either to rescue him out of their hands, or to avenge his death. Then entered Satan — For he is never wanting to assist those whose hearts are bent upon mischief; into Judas — Being one of the twelve. This was a circumstance of such high aggravation, that it is observable each of the evangelists has marked it out in this view. See on Matthew 26:14-16, and Mark 14:10. He went — He went from Christ and his company, who were at Bethany, in the house of Simon, to the house of Caiaphas, the high-priest, whom he knew to be a most inveterate enemy to his Master, and having found means of introducing himself, and communicating his general design, communed, or conversed, with the chief priests and captains — Called captains of the temple, verse 52. They were Jewish officers, who presided over the guards which kept watch every night in the temple. The result of their communing is not mentioned, only by the sequel it appears, that he informed the priests of the place where his Master used to spend the nights, and undertook to conduct a band of armed men thither, who, in the absence of the multitude, might easily take him. And, because none of them were so well acquainted with Jesus as to be able to distinguish him from his disciples, in the darkness of the night, he agreed to point him out to them by kissing him. And they were glad — When they heard his proposal, they thought it very practicable, and rejoiced at so unexpected an offer from one of his disciples, to facilitate their measures. And covenanted to give him money — As a reward for that service. See on Matthew 26:4-16. And he promised — To attend particularly to the affair; and sought opportunity to betray him — To put him into their hands in as private a manner as possible; in the absence of the multitude — That, knowing nothing of what was done, they might not raise a tumult, and rescue him out of the hands of those that seized him.

Ver. 4. He went his way, and communed with the chief priests and strathgoi, captains. The offices of priests and levites, of the twenty four courses, had each a superior; but these were captains of the temple, and called by that military name because they bore arms. Those captains were rulers of the temple, and saw the brazen gates shut at night by a guard of strong men.

Verse 5. They-covenanted to give him money.] Matthew says thirty pieces, or staters, of silver, about 4£. 10s. English, the common price of the meanest slave. See Clarke’s note on “Matthew 26:15”.

Verses 1-6. Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh — Being to be celebrated within two days after our Lord had delivered the prophecies and admonitions recorded above. Concerning this feast, see on Matthew 26:2. The chief priests and scribes sought how they might kill him — See on Matthew 26:3-5. But they feared the people — Lest, if they seized him openly, a tumult should be raised among them, either to rescue him out of their hands, or to avenge his death. Then entered Satan — For he is never wanting to assist those whose hearts are bent upon mischief; into Judas — Being one of the twelve. This was a circumstance of such high aggravation, that it is observable each of the evangelists has marked it out in this view. See on Matthew 26:14-16, and Mark 14:10. He went — He went from Christ and his company, who were at Bethany, in the house of Simon, to the house of Caiaphas, the high-priest, whom he knew to be a most inveterate enemy to his Master, and having found means of introducing himself, and communicating his general design, communed, or conversed, with the chief priests and captains — Called captains of the temple, verse 52. They were Jewish officers, who presided over the guards which kept watch every night in the temple. The result of their communing is not mentioned, only by the sequel it appears, that he informed the priests of the place where his Master used to spend the nights, and undertook to conduct a band of armed men thither, who, in the absence of the multitude, might easily take him. And, because none of them were so well acquainted with Jesus as to be able to distinguish him from his disciples, in the darkness of the night, he agreed to point him out to them by kissing him. And they were glad — When they heard his proposal, they thought it very practicable, and rejoiced at so unexpected an offer from one of his disciples, to facilitate their measures. And covenanted to give him money — As a reward for that service. See on Matthew 26:4-16. And he promised — To attend particularly to the affair; and sought opportunity to betray him — To put him into their hands in as private a manner as possible; in the absence of the multitude — That, knowing nothing of what was done, they might not raise a tumult, and rescue him out of the hands of those that seized him.

Ver. 5. They were glad, and covenanted to give him money. Christ was valued, as Jeremiah says; a price was set upon him, as the chief enemy of the temple.

Verse 6. And he promised] That is, to do it-exwmologhse: or, He accepted the proposal. See Wakefield.

Verses 1-6. Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh — Being to be celebrated within two days after our Lord had delivered the prophecies and admonitions recorded above. Concerning this feast, see on Matthew 26:2. The chief priests and scribes sought how they might kill him — See on Matthew 26:3-5. But they feared the people — Lest, if they seized him openly, a tumult should be raised among them, either to rescue him out of their hands, or to avenge his death. Then entered Satan — For he is never wanting to assist those whose hearts are bent upon mischief; into Judas — Being one of the twelve. This was a circumstance of such high aggravation, that it is observable each of the evangelists has marked it out in this view. See on Matthew 26:14-16, and Mark 14:10. He went — He went from Christ and his company, who were at Bethany, in the house of Simon, to the house of Caiaphas, the high-priest, whom he knew to be a most inveterate enemy to his Master, and having found means of introducing himself, and communicating his general design, communed, or conversed, with the chief priests and captains — Called captains of the temple, verse 52. They were Jewish officers, who presided over the guards which kept watch every night in the temple. The result of their communing is not mentioned, only by the sequel it appears, that he informed the priests of the place where his Master used to spend the nights, and undertook to conduct a band of armed men thither, who, in the absence of the multitude, might easily take him. And, because none of them were so well acquainted with Jesus as to be able to distinguish him from his disciples, in the darkness of the night, he agreed to point him out to them by kissing him. And they were glad — When they heard his proposal, they thought it very practicable, and rejoiced at so unexpected an offer from one of his disciples, to facilitate their measures. And covenanted to give him money — As a reward for that service. See on Matthew 26:4-16. And he promised — To attend particularly to the affair; and sought opportunity to betray him — To put him into their hands in as private a manner as possible; in the absence of the multitude — That, knowing nothing of what was done, they might not raise a tumult, and rescue him out of the hands of those that seized him.

V. 7. Matthew 26:17; Mark 14:12.

Verse 7. The passover] pasca, Luke 22:1, is the name of the festival; to pasca here is supposed to be the name of that on which they feasted, viz. the sacrificed paschal lamb. But see the notes on Matt. 26, and especially the observations at the end of that chapter. See Clarke “Matthew 26:75”

Verses 7-13. Then came the day of unleavened bread, when the passover must be killed — They called the day on which the passover was killed, one of the days of unleavened bread, and the first day thereof, because it was preparatory to that feast; though, properly speaking, the first day began with the passover-supper. This appears likewise from Josephus, who, making use of the vulgar computation, tells us, that the feast of unleavened bread lasted eight days; whereas, in the law, it was ordered to be kept only seven days. Thus Exodus 12:19: Seven days shall there be no leaven found in your houses. He sent Peter and John — From the place where he had spent the night before in retirement with them; saying, Go and prepare us the passover — Go, buy a lamb for us, and get it killed and roasted, and make the other preparations, that we may, once more, eat it together. They said, Where wilt thou that we prepare? — See on Matthew 26:17, and Mark 14:10-16: where this paragraph is considered at large.

Verse 8. - 13. He sent Peter and John, &c.] See the subject of these verses largely explained on Matthew 26:17-19, and Mark 14:13, 15.

Verses 7-13. Then came the day of unleavened bread, when the passover must be killed — They called the day on which the passover was killed, one of the days of unleavened bread, and the first day thereof, because it was preparatory to that feast; though, properly speaking, the first day began with the passover-supper. This appears likewise from Josephus, who, making use of the vulgar computation, tells us, that the feast of unleavened bread lasted eight days; whereas, in the law, it was ordered to be kept only seven days. Thus Exodus 12:19: Seven days shall there be no leaven found in your houses. He sent Peter and John — From the place where he had spent the night before in retirement with them; saying, Go and prepare us the passover — Go, buy a lamb for us, and get it killed and roasted, and make the other preparations, that we may, once more, eat it together. They said, Where wilt thou that we prepare? — See on Matthew 26:17, and Mark 14:10-16: where this paragraph is considered at large.

Verse 8. - 13. He sent Peter and John, &c.] See the subject of these verses largely explained on Matthew 26:17-19, and Mark 14:13, 15.

Verses 7-13. Then came the day of unleavened bread, when the passover must be killed — They called the day on which the passover was killed, one of the days of unleavened bread, and the first day thereof, because it was preparatory to that feast; though, properly speaking, the first day began with the passover-supper. This appears likewise from Josephus, who, making use of the vulgar computation, tells us, that the feast of unleavened bread lasted eight days; whereas, in the law, it was ordered to be kept only seven days. Thus Exodus 12:19: Seven days shall there be no leaven found in your houses. He sent Peter and John — From the place where he had spent the night before in retirement with them; saying, Go and prepare us the passover — Go, buy a lamb for us, and get it killed and roasted, and make the other preparations, that we may, once more, eat it together. They said, Where wilt thou that we prepare? — See on Matthew 26:17, and Mark 14:10-16: where this paragraph is considered at large.

Verse 8. - 13. He sent Peter and John, &c.] See the subject of these verses largely explained on Matthew 26:17-19, and Mark 14:13, 15.

Verses 7-13. Then came the day of unleavened bread, when the passover must be killed — They called the day on which the passover was killed, one of the days of unleavened bread, and the first day thereof, because it was preparatory to that feast; though, properly speaking, the first day began with the passover-supper. This appears likewise from Josephus, who, making use of the vulgar computation, tells us, that the feast of unleavened bread lasted eight days; whereas, in the law, it was ordered to be kept only seven days. Thus Exodus 12:19: Seven days shall there be no leaven found in your houses. He sent Peter and John — From the place where he had spent the night before in retirement with them; saying, Go and prepare us the passover — Go, buy a lamb for us, and get it killed and roasted, and make the other preparations, that we may, once more, eat it together. They said, Where wilt thou that we prepare? — See on Matthew 26:17, and Mark 14:10-16: where this paragraph is considered at large.

10. A man bearing a pitcher—Doubtless a servant coming with water from the western part of the city as the apostles entered the eastern part. § 122. JESUS SITS DOWN WITH THE TWELVE—AMBITIOUS

Verse 8. - 13. He sent Peter and John, &c.] See the subject of these verses largely explained on Matthew 26:17-19, and Mark 14:13, 15.

Verses 7-13. Then came the day of unleavened bread, when the passover must be killed — They called the day on which the passover was killed, one of the days of unleavened bread, and the first day thereof, because it was preparatory to that feast; though, properly speaking, the first day began with the passover-supper. This appears likewise from Josephus, who, making use of the vulgar computation, tells us, that the feast of unleavened bread lasted eight days; whereas, in the law, it was ordered to be kept only seven days. Thus Exodus 12:19: Seven days shall there be no leaven found in your houses. He sent Peter and John — From the place where he had spent the night before in retirement with them; saying, Go and prepare us the passover — Go, buy a lamb for us, and get it killed and roasted, and make the other preparations, that we may, once more, eat it together. They said, Where wilt thou that we prepare? — See on Matthew 26:17, and Mark 14:10-16: where this paragraph is considered at large.

Verse 8. - 13. He sent Peter and John, &c.] See the subject of these verses largely explained on Matthew 26:17-19, and Mark 14:13, 15.

Verses 7-13. Then came the day of unleavened bread, when the passover must be killed — They called the day on which the passover was killed, one of the days of unleavened bread, and the first day thereof, because it was preparatory to that feast; though, properly speaking, the first day began with the passover-supper. This appears likewise from Josephus, who, making use of the vulgar computation, tells us, that the feast of unleavened bread lasted eight days; whereas, in the law, it was ordered to be kept only seven days. Thus Exodus 12:19: Seven days shall there be no leaven found in your houses. He sent Peter and John — From the place where he had spent the night before in retirement with them; saying, Go and prepare us the passover — Go, buy a lamb for us, and get it killed and roasted, and make the other preparations, that we may, once more, eat it together. They said, Where wilt thou that we prepare? — See on Matthew 26:17, and Mark 14:10-16: where this paragraph is considered at large.

Verse 8. - 13. He sent Peter and John, &c.] See the subject of these verses largely explained on Matthew 26:17-19, and Mark 14:13, 15.

Verses 7-13. Then came the day of unleavened bread, when the passover must be killed — They called the day on which the passover was killed, one of the days of unleavened bread, and the first day thereof, because it was preparatory to that feast; though, properly speaking, the first day began with the passover-supper. This appears likewise from Josephus, who, making use of the vulgar computation, tells us, that the feast of unleavened bread lasted eight days; whereas, in the law, it was ordered to be kept only seven days. Thus Exodus 12:19: Seven days shall there be no leaven found in your houses. He sent Peter and John — From the place where he had spent the night before in retirement with them; saying, Go and prepare us the passover — Go, buy a lamb for us, and get it killed and roasted, and make the other preparations, that we may, once more, eat it together. They said, Where wilt thou that we prepare? — See on Matthew 26:17, and Mark 14:10-16: where this paragraph is considered at large.

V. 14. Matthew 26:20; Mark 14:17.

Verse 14. And when the hour was come] That is, the evening. See Matthew 26:20, and Mark 14:17.

Verses 14-18. When the hour was come, &c. — When the evening approached, Jesus left Bethany; and every thing being prepared by the time he came into the city, they all sat down at the appointed hour. And he said, With desire I have desired — That is, I have earnestly desired it. He desired it, both for the sake of his disciples, to whom he desired to manifest himself further, at this solemn parting; and for the sake of his whole church, that he might institute the grand memorial of his death. For I will not any more eat thereof until, &c. — That is, it will be the last time I shall eat with you before I die. The particle until, used here and verse 18, does not imply that, after the things signified by the passover were fulfilled, in the gospel dispensation, our Lord was to eat the passover. It is only a Hebrew form of expression, signifying that the thing mentioned was no more to be done for ever. Until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of heaven — That is, until the deliverance of mankind from the bondage of sin and death is procured by my death and resurrection; a deliverance typified by that of our fathers from the Egyptian bondage, to keep up the memory of which the passover was instituted. And he took the cup, and gave thanks — Having spoken as above, Jesus took a cup of wine in his hand, that cup which used to be brought at the beginning of the paschal solemnity, and gave thanks to Almighty God for his great goodness to his people, mentioning, no doubt, some of the principal instances thereof, especially their redemption, first from Egypt, and then from Babylon. And said, Take this, and divide it among yourselves, for I will not drink, &c. — As if he had said, Do not expect me to drink of it: I will drink no more before I die. Or, his meaning might be, After what passes, this evening, I will not drink any more with you of the fruit of the vine; therefore, as it is the last paschal supper that I shall partake of with you, let that consideration be an additional reason for your celebrating it with peculiar seriousness and devotion. Until the kingdom of God shall come — Till the gospel dispensation shall be fully opened, or till that complete and spiritual redemption, which is typified by this ordinance, shall be fulfilled and perfected.

CONTENTION AMONG THEM, 14-18, 24-30.

Matthew 26:20; Mark 14:17.

14. Sat down—It must never be forgotten, in reading descriptions of the ancient meals, that there was no sitting in chairs, but reclining on couches at the table. The best commentators, assuming that Luke has changed the order, place the strife of the twelve (24-30) immediately upon their sitting down. Then, in reproof of that strife, follows the washing of the apostles’ feet, given by John.

V. 15. With desire have I desired-That is, I have earnestly desired it. He desired it, both for the sake of his disciples, to whom he desired to manifest himself farther, at this solemn parting: and for the sake of his whole Church, that he might institute the grand memorial of his death.

Verse 15. With desire I have desired] A Hebraism for, I have desired most earnestly. Our Lord’s meaning seems to be, that, having purposed to redeem a lost world by his blood, he ardently longed for the time in which he was to offer himself up. Such love did the holy Jesus bear to the human race. This eucharistic passover was celebrated once, by way of anticipation, before the bloody sacrifice of the victim of salvation, and before the deliverance it was appointed to commemorate; as the figurative passover had been likewise once celebrated before the going out of Egypt, and the deliverance of God’s chosen people. Quesnel.

Verses 14-18. When the hour was come, &c. — When the evening approached, Jesus left Bethany; and every thing being prepared by the time he came into the city, they all sat down at the appointed hour. And he said, With desire I have desired — That is, I have earnestly desired it. He desired it, both for the sake of his disciples, to whom he desired to manifest himself further, at this solemn parting; and for the sake of his whole church, that he might institute the grand memorial of his death. For I will not any more eat thereof until, &c. — That is, it will be the last time I shall eat with you before I die. The particle until, used here and verse 18, does not imply that, after the things signified by the passover were fulfilled, in the gospel dispensation, our Lord was to eat the passover. It is only a Hebrew form of expression, signifying that the thing mentioned was no more to be done for ever. Until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of heaven — That is, until the deliverance of mankind from the bondage of sin and death is procured by my death and resurrection; a deliverance typified by that of our fathers from the Egyptian bondage, to keep up the memory of which the passover was instituted. And he took the cup, and gave thanks — Having spoken as above, Jesus took a cup of wine in his hand, that cup which used to be brought at the beginning of the paschal solemnity, and gave thanks to Almighty God for his great goodness to his people, mentioning, no doubt, some of the principal instances thereof, especially their redemption, first from Egypt, and then from Babylon. And said, Take this, and divide it among yourselves, for I will not drink, &c. — As if he had said, Do not expect me to drink of it: I will drink no more before I die. Or, his meaning might be, After what passes, this evening, I will not drink any more with you of the fruit of the vine; therefore, as it is the last paschal supper that I shall partake of with you, let that consideration be an additional reason for your celebrating it with peculiar seriousness and devotion. Until the kingdom of God shall come — Till the gospel dispensation shall be fully opened, or till that complete and spiritual redemption, which is typified by this ordinance, shall be fulfilled and perfected.

Ver. 15. With desire, yea, with the supreme desire of consummating my work and victory, have I desired to eat this passover. The transactions of the last supper are full of grace, and claim our special attention.

15. With desire I have desired—The Hebrew mode of saying I have had a most intense desire. The deep emotion of the Saviour at coming to the hour of his last converse with his chosen ones, fills his language with an exquisite pathos. And these last hours were to be devoted to instituting the symbols of his own death. He was to die, be emblematically slain before them, and to appoint the ever-continued repetition of that symbolical death in his Church through future ages. No wonder that he had looked forward to that supper with earnest emotion, and had well provided that it should be an hour upon whose sacred privacy no enemy but one should intrude. The present passage (15-18) narrates that part of the supper which belonged to the Passover. That which belonged to the institution of the Lord’s Supper is verses 19, 20. See notes on Matthew 26:26, with introductory note preceding.

V. 16. For I will not eat thereof any more-That is, it will be the last I shall eat with you before I die.

The kingdom of God did not properly commence till his resurrection. Then was fulfilled what was typified by the passover.

Verse 16. Until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God.] That is, until that of which the passover is a type is fulfilled in my death, through which the kingdom of God, or of heaven, (See Matthew 3:2,) shall be established among men.

Verses 14-18. When the hour was come, &c. — When the evening approached, Jesus left Bethany; and every thing being prepared by the time he came into the city, they all sat down at the appointed hour. And he said, With desire I have desired — That is, I have earnestly desired it. He desired it, both for the sake of his disciples, to whom he desired to manifest himself further, at this solemn parting; and for the sake of his whole church, that he might institute the grand memorial of his death. For I will not any more eat thereof until, &c. — That is, it will be the last time I shall eat with you before I die. The particle until, used here and verse 18, does not imply that, after the things signified by the passover were fulfilled, in the gospel dispensation, our Lord was to eat the passover. It is only a Hebrew form of expression, signifying that the thing mentioned was no more to be done for ever. Until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of heaven — That is, until the deliverance of mankind from the bondage of sin and death is procured by my death and resurrection; a deliverance typified by that of our fathers from the Egyptian bondage, to keep up the memory of which the passover was instituted. And he took the cup, and gave thanks — Having spoken as above, Jesus took a cup of wine in his hand, that cup which used to be brought at the beginning of the paschal solemnity, and gave thanks to Almighty God for his great goodness to his people, mentioning, no doubt, some of the principal instances thereof, especially their redemption, first from Egypt, and then from Babylon. And said, Take this, and divide it among yourselves, for I will not drink, &c. — As if he had said, Do not expect me to drink of it: I will drink no more before I die. Or, his meaning might be, After what passes, this evening, I will not drink any more with you of the fruit of the vine; therefore, as it is the last paschal supper that I shall partake of with you, let that consideration be an additional reason for your celebrating it with peculiar seriousness and devotion. Until the kingdom of God shall come — Till the gospel dispensation shall be fully opened, or till that complete and spiritual redemption, which is typified by this ordinance, shall be fulfilled and perfected.

16. Eat thereof—Whether as Passover or Lord’s Supper; both being the same thing in successive stages of development. Until it be fulfilled—Until the emblem is fulfilled in the glorious reality. In the kingdom of God—In the resurrection state.

V. 17. And he took the cup-That cup which used to be brought at the beginning of the paschal solemnity, and said,

Take this and divide it among yourselves; for I will not drink-As if he had said, Do not expect me to drink of it: I will drink no more before I die.

Verse 17. He took the cup] This was not the sacramental cup, for that was taken after supper, Luke 22:20, but was the cup which was ordinarily taken before supper.

Divide it among yourselves] Pass the cup from one to another; thus the cup which Christ gave to the first person on his right hand continued to be handed from one to another, till it came to the last person on his left.

Verses 14-18. When the hour was come, &c. — When the evening approached, Jesus left Bethany; and every thing being prepared by the time he came into the city, they all sat down at the appointed hour. And he said, With desire I have desired — That is, I have earnestly desired it. He desired it, both for the sake of his disciples, to whom he desired to manifest himself further, at this solemn parting; and for the sake of his whole church, that he might institute the grand memorial of his death. For I will not any more eat thereof until, &c. — That is, it will be the last time I shall eat with you before I die. The particle until, used here and verse 18, does not imply that, after the things signified by the passover were fulfilled, in the gospel dispensation, our Lord was to eat the passover. It is only a Hebrew form of expression, signifying that the thing mentioned was no more to be done for ever. Until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of heaven — That is, until the deliverance of mankind from the bondage of sin and death is procured by my death and resurrection; a deliverance typified by that of our fathers from the Egyptian bondage, to keep up the memory of which the passover was instituted. And he took the cup, and gave thanks — Having spoken as above, Jesus took a cup of wine in his hand, that cup which used to be brought at the beginning of the paschal solemnity, and gave thanks to Almighty God for his great goodness to his people, mentioning, no doubt, some of the principal instances thereof, especially their redemption, first from Egypt, and then from Babylon. And said, Take this, and divide it among yourselves, for I will not drink, &c. — As if he had said, Do not expect me to drink of it: I will drink no more before I die. Or, his meaning might be, After what passes, this evening, I will not drink any more with you of the fruit of the vine; therefore, as it is the last paschal supper that I shall partake of with you, let that consideration be an additional reason for your celebrating it with peculiar seriousness and devotion. Until the kingdom of God shall come — Till the gospel dispensation shall be fully opened, or till that complete and spiritual redemption, which is typified by this ordinance, shall be fulfilled and perfected.

17. And he took the cup—The passover cup. Divide it among yourselves— He drank it not himself.

Verse 18. I will not drink of the fruit of the vine] That is, before the time of another passover, the Holy Ghost shall descend, the Gospel of the kingdom be established, and the sacramental supper shall take place of the paschal lamb; for in a few hours his crucifixion was to take place. See Clarke on “Matthew 26:29”.

Verses 14-18. When the hour was come, &c. — When the evening approached, Jesus left Bethany; and every thing being prepared by the time he came into the city, they all sat down at the appointed hour. And he said, With desire I have desired — That is, I have earnestly desired it. He desired it, both for the sake of his disciples, to whom he desired to manifest himself further, at this solemn parting; and for the sake of his whole church, that he might institute the grand memorial of his death. For I will not any more eat thereof until, &c. — That is, it will be the last time I shall eat with you before I die. The particle until, used here and verse 18, does not imply that, after the things signified by the passover were fulfilled, in the gospel dispensation, our Lord was to eat the passover. It is only a Hebrew form of expression, signifying that the thing mentioned was no more to be done for ever. Until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of heaven — That is, until the deliverance of mankind from the bondage of sin and death is procured by my death and resurrection; a deliverance typified by that of our fathers from the Egyptian bondage, to keep up the memory of which the passover was instituted. And he took the cup, and gave thanks — Having spoken as above, Jesus took a cup of wine in his hand, that cup which used to be brought at the beginning of the paschal solemnity, and gave thanks to Almighty God for his great goodness to his people, mentioning, no doubt, some of the principal instances thereof, especially their redemption, first from Egypt, and then from Babylon. And said, Take this, and divide it among yourselves, for I will not drink, &c. — As if he had said, Do not expect me to drink of it: I will drink no more before I die. Or, his meaning might be, After what passes, this evening, I will not drink any more with you of the fruit of the vine; therefore, as it is the last paschal supper that I shall partake of with you, let that consideration be an additional reason for your celebrating it with peculiar seriousness and devotion. Until the kingdom of God shall come — Till the gospel dispensation shall be fully opened, or till that complete and spiritual redemption, which is typified by this ordinance, shall be fulfilled and perfected.

18. Until the kingdom of God shall come—These words were in substance repeated at the drinking of the sacramental cup, as appears by Matthew 26:29, on which see our notes.

V. 19. And he took bread-Namely, some time after, when supper was ended, wherein they had eaten the paschal lamb.

This is my body-As he had just now celebrated the paschal supper, which was called the passover, so in like figurative language, he calls this bread his body. And this circumstance of itself was sufficient to prevent any mistake, as if this bread was his real body, any more than the paschal lamb was really the passover.

Verse 19. Took bread] See the nature and design of the Lord’s Supper explained in Clarke’s notes on Matthew 26:26-29. This do in remembrance of me.] That the Jews, in eating the passover, did it to represent the sufferings of the Messiah, as evident from the tract Pesachim, fol. 119, quoted by Schoettgen. Why do we call this the great hallel? (i.e. the hymn composed of several psalms, which they sung after the paschal supper.) Ans. Because in it these five things are contained: 1. The exodus from Egypt. 2. The dividing of the Red Sea. 3. The promulgation of the law. 4. The resurrection of the dead. And, 5. The sufferings of the Messiah. The first is referred to, Psalm 114:1, When Israel went out of Egypt, &c. The second in Psalm 114:3, The sea saw it and fled. The third in Psalm 114:4, The mountains skipped like rams, &c. The fourth in Psalm 116:9, I will walk before the Lord in the land of the living. The fifth in Psalm 115:1, Not unto us, O Lord, not unto us, but unto thy name give glory; for thy mercy and thy truth’s sake. See Clarke’s note on “Matthew 26:30”.

Verses 19, 20. And he took bread — Namely, some time after, when the supper was ended, wherein they had eaten the paschal lamb. And gave thanks, and brake it — Matthew and Mark say, Blessed and brake it. They do not say, Blessed it: for the word it, though supplied in our translation in Matthew, is not in the original: for which reason, and because Luke here uses the word eucaristhsav, he gave thanks, many are of opinion that the word God should be supplied in Matthew; he blessed God. And gave unto them, saying, This is my body — That is, the representation of my body, to be broken on the cross. See the like form of expression, Genesis 41:26, 27. As our Lord had just now celebrated the paschal supper, which was called the passover, so, in the like figurative language, he calls this bread his body. And this circumstance of itself was sufficient to prevent any such mistake, as that this bread was his real body, any more than the paschal lamb was really the passover. This do in remembrance of me — The passover solemnity was usually concluded with eating a little bread and drinking a cup of wine. Jesus, therefore, when he instituted the Lord’s supper, did not appoint any new rite, but appropriated an old one to a new purpose. Hence the propriety of the expression, This do in remembrance of me. Do it no longer in remembrance of the deliverance from Egypt, but in remembrance of me, who, by dying for you, will bring you out of spiritual bondage, a bondage far worse than the Egyptian, under which your fathers groaned, and will establish you in the glorious liberty of God’s children: do it in remembrance of me, who, by laying down my life, will ransom you from sin, and death, and hell; and will set open the gates of heaven to you, that you may enter immortality and triumph. Likewise also the cup after supper — This the Jews termed the cup of thanksgiving, it being the cup usually given by the master of the family to each after supper: and Matthew says, Jesus took this, and gave thanks. For, at the institution of the sacrament, he not only gave thanks before he brake and distributed the bread, but before he delivered the cup, to show how infinitely we are obliged to God for our spiritual food, the flesh and blood of his Son, which nourishes the divine life in the soul. Saying, This cup is the new testament, or covenant, (as the word diaqhkh rather means,) in my blood — Here is an undeniable figure, whereby the cup is put for the wine in the cup. And this is called, the new covenant in Christ’s blood, which could not possibly mean that it was the new covenant itself, but only the seal of it, and the sign of that blood, which was shed to confirm it. In other words, as the expression, this is my body, signifies, This is the representation of my body; so, this is my blood of the new covenant, must signify, This is the representation of my blood. And Christ’s meaning in the passage is: All of you, and all my disciples in all ages, must drink of this cup, because it represents my blood, shed for the remission of men’s sins; my blood, in which the new covenant between God and man is ratified; so that this institution exhibits to your joyful meditation the grand foundation of men’s hopes, and perpetuates the memory of the same to the end of the world.

We here see, then, that it is a primary end of this solemn service, to bring to the devout remembrance of Christians the death of their Master, as the foundation of the remission of their sins; and, in short, the whole mercy of the new covenant, as founded on the shedding of his blood. Therefore, they err who make the keeping up of the memory of Christ’s death in the world, as a simple fact, the only end of the Lord’s supper. We may observe, further, that “from our Lord’s words, here recorded, and from those wherewith the apostle has concluded his account of the Lord’s supper, 1 Corinthians 11:26, As often as ye eat this bread, &c., ye do show (kataggellete, ye preach, ye declare) the Lord’s death till he come, it appears this sacrament was instituted, not only to bring Christ’s sufferings, and the consequence thereof, to the remembrance of his disciples, but to demonstrate the truth of these things to the world, in all ages. In this view, the Lord’s supper is the strongest proof of his integrity, and of the truth of his mission; for if he had been an impostor, and was to have suffered death on account of his deluding the people, is it to be imagined that he would have instituted any rite with a view to preserve the memory of his having suffered punishment for the worst of crimes? No: this is beyond all human belief. And therefore, since by this institution he has perpetuated the memory of his own sufferings, it is a strong presumption that he was conscious of his own innocence, that his character was really what the evangelists have represented it to be, and that our faith in him, as the Son of God, is well founded.” — Macknight.

Ver. 19. He took bread, a figure of his body broken for us. Collectively considered, this is a figure of his church, composed of many members, as the loaf is composed of many grains of wheat. His flesh spiritually sustains the divine life, as bread sustains the life of the body. Adorable mystery, where faith is lost in the plenitude of redeeming love.

§§ 126, 128. THE INSTITUTION OF THE LORD’S SUPPER, 19, 20. See notes on Matthew 26:26; Mark 14:22.

20. This cup is the new testament—The Greek word for testament should be rendered covenant. And the fruit of the vine is the symbol of the new covenant; that is, the covenant of the new dispensation, in the place of the covenant of Moses. A covenant is a compact by which two parties stipulate mutual things. Covenants were anciently made and ratified by or in the blood of a victim sacrificed by the parties. The old covenant in blood, made by God through Moses, is found in Exodus 24:3-8. The blood by which that covenant was sanctioned was the blood of slain beasts. But this is the covenant ratified by or in the blood of the Lamb of God. Shed for you— The emblem of the death of the Lord’s body substituted in the place of the death of your soul.

V. 20. This cup is the New Testament-Here is an undeniable figure, whereby the cup is put for the wine in the cup. And this is called, The New Testament in Christ's blood, which could not possibly mean, that it was the New Testament itself, but only the seal of it, and the sign of that blood which was shed to confirm it.

Verse 20. This cup is the new testament in my blood] Perhaps it might be better to paraphrase the passage thus: This cup which is poured out for you, signifies the blood of the new covenant, which is shortly to be ratified in (or by) the shedding of my blood. Or, This cup is the new covenant, poured out for you with my blood:-that is, the paschal sacrifice and my sacrifice happen together. But see Kypke.

It does not appear that our Lord handed either the bread or the cup to each person; he gave it to him who was next to him, and, by handing it from one to another, they shared it among themselves, Luke 22:17. In this respect the present mode of administering the Lord’s Supper is not strictly according to the original institution.

Verses 19, 20. And he took bread — Namely, some time after, when the supper was ended, wherein they had eaten the paschal lamb. And gave thanks, and brake it — Matthew and Mark say, Blessed and brake it. They do not say, Blessed it: for the word it, though supplied in our translation in Matthew, is not in the original: for which reason, and because Luke here uses the word eucaristhsav, he gave thanks, many are of opinion that the word God should be supplied in Matthew; he blessed God. And gave unto them, saying, This is my body — That is, the representation of my body, to be broken on the cross. See the like form of expression, Genesis 41:26, 27. As our Lord had just now celebrated the paschal supper, which was called the passover, so, in the like figurative language, he calls this bread his body. And this circumstance of itself was sufficient to prevent any such mistake, as that this bread was his real body, any more than the paschal lamb was really the passover. This do in remembrance of me — The passover solemnity was usually concluded with eating a little bread and drinking a cup of wine. Jesus, therefore, when he instituted the Lord’s supper, did not appoint any new rite, but appropriated an old one to a new purpose. Hence the propriety of the expression, This do in remembrance of me. Do it no longer in remembrance of the deliverance from Egypt, but in remembrance of me, who, by dying for you, will bring you out of spiritual bondage, a bondage far worse than the Egyptian, under which your fathers groaned, and will establish you in the glorious liberty of God’s children: do it in remembrance of me, who, by laying down my life, will ransom you from sin, and death, and hell; and will set open the gates of heaven to you, that you may enter immortality and triumph. Likewise also the cup after supper — This the Jews termed the cup of thanksgiving, it being the cup usually given by the master of the family to each after supper: and Matthew says, Jesus took this, and gave thanks. For, at the institution of the sacrament, he not only gave thanks before he brake and distributed the bread, but before he delivered the cup, to show how infinitely we are obliged to God for our spiritual food, the flesh and blood of his Son, which nourishes the divine life in the soul. Saying, This cup is the new testament, or covenant, (as the word diaqhkh rather means,) in my blood — Here is an undeniable figure, whereby the cup is put for the wine in the cup. And this is called, the new covenant in Christ’s blood, which could not possibly mean that it was the new covenant itself, but only the seal of it, and the sign of that blood, which was shed to confirm it. In other words, as the expression, this is my body, signifies, This is the representation of my body; so, this is my blood of the new covenant, must signify, This is the representation of my blood. And Christ’s meaning in the passage is: All of you, and all my disciples in all ages, must drink of this cup, because it represents my blood, shed for the remission of men’s sins; my blood, in which the new covenant between God and man is ratified; so that this institution exhibits to your joyful meditation the grand foundation of men’s hopes, and perpetuates the memory of the same to the end of the world.

We here see, then, that it is a primary end of this solemn service, to bring to the devout remembrance of Christians the death of their Master, as the foundation of the remission of their sins; and, in short, the whole mercy of the new covenant, as founded on the shedding of his blood. Therefore, they err who make the keeping up of the memory of Christ’s death in the world, as a simple fact, the only end of the Lord’s supper. We may observe, further, that “from our Lord’s words, here recorded, and from those wherewith the apostle has concluded his account of the Lord’s supper, 1 Corinthians 11:26, As often as ye eat this bread, &c., ye do show (kataggellete, ye preach, ye declare) the Lord’s death till he come, it appears this sacrament was instituted, not only to bring Christ’s sufferings, and the consequence thereof, to the remembrance of his disciples, but to demonstrate the truth of these things to the world, in all ages. In this view, the Lord’s supper is the strongest proof of his integrity, and of the truth of his mission; for if he had been an impostor, and was to have suffered death on account of his deluding the people, is it to be imagined that he would have instituted any rite with a view to preserve the memory of his having suffered punishment for the worst of crimes? No: this is beyond all human belief. And therefore, since by this institution he has perpetuated the memory of his own sufferings, it is a strong presumption that he was conscious of his own innocence, that his character was really what the evangelists have represented it to be, and that our faith in him, as the Son of God, is well founded.” — Macknight.

Ver. 20. This cup is the new testament in my blood, or covenant, which is shed for you, for the remission of sins. When princes made covenants, they drank wine; and when the highpriest offered sacrifice, he poured out a libation of wine on the victim. Here is the ransom, here is remission of sins, here is joy for the righteous. Here is the cup of memorial: this do in remembrance of me. The jews ate the paschal supper in remembrance of the emancipation from Egypt, a national memorial, local and small compared with the redemption of the world by our Lord Jesus Christ. — It is a cup once for all. “I will not drink of the fruit of the wine, until the kingdom of God shall come:” ver. 18. What a felicitous transition of thought, and what burning words to enkindle the heart with a flame of devotion.

§§ 126, 128. THE INSTITUTION OF THE LORD’S SUPPER, 19, 20. See notes on Matthew 26:26; Mark 14:22.

20. This cup is the new testament—The Greek word for testament should be rendered covenant. And the fruit of the vine is the symbol of the new covenant; that is, the covenant of the new dispensation, in the place of the covenant of Moses. A covenant is a compact by which two parties stipulate mutual things. Covenants were anciently made and ratified by or in the blood of a victim sacrificed by the parties. The old covenant in blood, made by God through Moses, is found in Exodus 24:3-8. The blood by which that covenant was sanctioned was the blood of slain beasts. But this is the covenant ratified by or in the blood of the Lamb of God. Shed for you— The emblem of the death of the Lord’s body substituted in the place of the death of your soul.

V. 21. The hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the table-It is evident Christ spake these words before he instituted the Lord's Supper: for all the other evangelists mention the sop, immediately after receiving which he went out: John 13:30. Nor did he return any more, till he came into the garden to betray his Master. Now this could not be dipped or given, but while the meat was on the table. But this was all removed before that bread and cup were brought.

Verse 21. The hand of him that betrayeth me, &c.] What can be desired more, says Dr. Lightfoot, as a demonstration that Judas was present at the eucharist? And, whereas the contrary is endeavoured to be proved out of John 13, nothing is made out of nothing; for there is not one syllable throughout that whole chapter of the paschal supper, but of a supper before the feast of the passover.

Verses 21-23. But behold — Plhn idou. This particle (plhn, verumtamen, nevertheless, or notwithstanding) “is a proof,” says Bengelius, “that Judas was present at the Lord’s supper;” for it shows that Christ’s discourse is continued without interruption; and it appears, from verse 14, that when he sat down to the supper and begun the discourse, the twelve were with him: Dr. Lightfoot was of the same opinion, who says, “What can be desired more, as a demonstration that Judas was present at the eucharist?” Thus also Henry: “By the placing this after the institution of the Lord’s supper, it seems plain that Judas did receive that supper, did eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.” On which he observes, “There have been those who have eaten bread with Christ, and yet have betrayed him.” According to Matthew and Mark, however, Jesus pointed out Judas, as the traitor, to the disciples at this supper, before the institution of the sacrament, as at a prior supper (see John 13:23, &c.) he had done to John. Perhaps he did it both before and after he instituted the eucharist. So Dr. Macknight thought. “Our Lord,” says he, “was now deeply affected with his own thoughts, for he uttered some of the things twice that lay heaviest upon his spirit, as persons in great concern are wont to do; particularly after delivering the sacramental cup, and telling them that his blood was shed for them, he mentioned the treachery of Judas a second time. And this second declaration came in very properly after the institution of the sacrament, which exhibits the highest instance of his love to mankind; his dying to obtain the remission of their sins. For it showed that the person who could deliberately do so great an injury to so kind a friend, must have been a monster, the foulness of whose ingratitude cannot be reached by the force of language.” The hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the table — “Manus quæ sacram cænam sumpsit, quæque hostibus perfidam fidem dedit.” The hand which took the sacred supper, and which gave a perfidious promise to enemies. So Bengelius. And truly the Son of man goeth — That is, dieth; as it was determined — See on Matthew 26:24, 25.

Ver. 21. The hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the table. It seems quite plain from this chapter, that Judas was present at the sacrament with Christ; and yet the first of critics are divided in opinion on this subject. It is also contended that this was not the paschal supper, but the common supper which preseded it. Grotius contends that the Lord having desired with strong desire to eat the passover before his passion, celebrated it one night before the time. Now, though Grotius held a first rank as a learned lawyer; yet as a divine he is guilty of temerity in a hundred places. Let it be remarked, that St. Matthew does not mention the time that Judas went out, neither does St. Mark. St. John mentions the sop, but not the supper: chap. 13:26. This sop, according to Erasmus, was psomion, panem, buccella, sive offula; bread, morsel, or fragment of flesh. It was probably a piece of unleavened bread dipped in the sauce of bitter herbs and gravy. In that case our Lord would not eat with the traitor, but sent him away.

§ 124. JESUS INDICATES HIS BETRAYER, 21-24.

See notes on Matthew 26:21-25; Mark 14:18-21; John 13:21-35.

21. Behold—How terrible the transition from the words of dying love which have just preceded. The hand of him that betrayeth me… on the table—Violating with its treacherous pressure the board of common love and unity.

Verse 22. The Son of man goeth] That is, he is about to die, apercesqai, oicesqai, abire, going, going away, and departing, are used, by the best Greek and Latin writers, for death and dying. See Rosenmuller.

Verses 21-23. But behold — Plhn idou. This particle (plhn, verumtamen, nevertheless, or notwithstanding) “is a proof,” says Bengelius, “that Judas was present at the Lord’s supper;” for it shows that Christ’s discourse is continued without interruption; and it appears, from verse 14, that when he sat down to the supper and begun the discourse, the twelve were with him: Dr. Lightfoot was of the same opinion, who says, “What can be desired more, as a demonstration that Judas was present at the eucharist?” Thus also Henry: “By the placing this after the institution of the Lord’s supper, it seems plain that Judas did receive that supper, did eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.” On which he observes, “There have been those who have eaten bread with Christ, and yet have betrayed him.” According to Matthew and Mark, however, Jesus pointed out Judas, as the traitor, to the disciples at this supper, before the institution of the sacrament, as at a prior supper (see John 13:23, &c.) he had done to John. Perhaps he did it both before and after he instituted the eucharist. So Dr. Macknight thought. “Our Lord,” says he, “was now deeply affected with his own thoughts, for he uttered some of the things twice that lay heaviest upon his spirit, as persons in great concern are wont to do; particularly after delivering the sacramental cup, and telling them that his blood was shed for them, he mentioned the treachery of Judas a second time. And this second declaration came in very properly after the institution of the sacrament, which exhibits the highest instance of his love to mankind; his dying to obtain the remission of their sins. For it showed that the person who could deliberately do so great an injury to so kind a friend, must have been a monster, the foulness of whose ingratitude cannot be reached by the force of language.” The hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the table — “Manus quæ sacram cænam sumpsit, quæque hostibus perfidam fidem dedit.” The hand which took the sacred supper, and which gave a perfidious promise to enemies. So Bengelius. And truly the Son of man goeth — That is, dieth; as it was determined — See on Matthew 26:24, 25.

Ver. 22. Woe to that man by whom he is betrayed. See Dr. Whitby’s remarkable note on this verse. Also on this head, a striking comment of Chrysostom will be found on Jeremiah 36:3.

§ 124. JESUS INDICATES HIS BETRAYER, 21-24.

See notes on Matthew 26:21-25; Mark 14:18-21; John 13:21-35.

21. Behold—How terrible the transition from the words of dying love which have just preceded. The hand of him that betrayeth me… on the table—Violating with its treacherous pressure the board of common love and unity.

Verse 23. They began to inquire among themselves] See Clarke’s notes on “Matthew 26:23”; “Matthew 26:24”.

Verses 21-23. But behold — Plhn idou. This particle (plhn, verumtamen, nevertheless, or notwithstanding) “is a proof,” says Bengelius, “that Judas was present at the Lord’s supper;” for it shows that Christ’s discourse is continued without interruption; and it appears, from verse 14, that when he sat down to the supper and begun the discourse, the twelve were with him: Dr. Lightfoot was of the same opinion, who says, “What can be desired more, as a demonstration that Judas was present at the eucharist?” Thus also Henry: “By the placing this after the institution of the Lord’s supper, it seems plain that Judas did receive that supper, did eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.” On which he observes, “There have been those who have eaten bread with Christ, and yet have betrayed him.” According to Matthew and Mark, however, Jesus pointed out Judas, as the traitor, to the disciples at this supper, before the institution of the sacrament, as at a prior supper (see John 13:23, &c.) he had done to John. Perhaps he did it both before and after he instituted the eucharist. So Dr. Macknight thought. “Our Lord,” says he, “was now deeply affected with his own thoughts, for he uttered some of the things twice that lay heaviest upon his spirit, as persons in great concern are wont to do; particularly after delivering the sacramental cup, and telling them that his blood was shed for them, he mentioned the treachery of Judas a second time. And this second declaration came in very properly after the institution of the sacrament, which exhibits the highest instance of his love to mankind; his dying to obtain the remission of their sins. For it showed that the person who could deliberately do so great an injury to so kind a friend, must have been a monster, the foulness of whose ingratitude cannot be reached by the force of language.” The hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the table — “Manus quæ sacram cænam sumpsit, quæque hostibus perfidam fidem dedit.” The hand which took the sacred supper, and which gave a perfidious promise to enemies. So Bengelius. And truly the Son of man goeth — That is, dieth; as it was determined — See on Matthew 26:24, 25.

§ 124. JESUS INDICATES HIS BETRAYER, 21-24.

See notes on Matthew 26:21-25; Mark 14:18-21; John 13:21-35.

21. Behold—How terrible the transition from the words of dying love which have just preceded. The hand of him that betrayeth me… on the table—Violating with its treacherous pressure the board of common love and unity.

V. 24. There was also a contention among them-It is highly probable, this was the same dispute which is mentioned by St. Matthew and St. Mark: and consequently, though it is related here, it happened some time before.

Verse 24. There was also a strife among them] There are two different instances of this sort of contention or strife mentioned by the evangelists, each of which was accompanied with very different circumstances; one by Matthew, in Matthew 18:1, &c., by Mark, Mark 9:33, &c.; and by Luke, in Luke 9:46, &c. That contention cannot have been the same with this which is mentioned here. The other, related in Matthew 20:20, &c., and Mark 10:35, &c., must be what Luke intended here to record; and this strife or contention was occasioned by the request which Zebedee’s wife made to our Lord in favour of her sons, James and John; but, then, Luke has mentioned this very much out of the order of time, it having happened while our Lord and his disciples were on their way to Jerusalem: Matthew 20:17; Mark 10:32. See Bp. PEARCE.

Verses 24-27. And there was also a strife among them, &c. — Of the kind of contentions here spoken of there are two instances recorded by the evangelists, evidently different from each other, and each attended with very different circumstances. The former is mentioned by Matthew 18:1-4; by Mark 9:33-37; and by Luke 9:46. This certainly is not that here referred to. The other, recorded Matthew 20:20, &c.; and Mark 10:35, &c., is thought, by most commentators, to be that which Luke here speaks of. See the notes on these two last mentioned passages. Some, however, are of opinion, that a third contention of a similar kind arose among the disciples, at this last paschal supper which our Lord ate with them; and that it arose from some expressions which he dropped respecting the glory of his heavenly kingdom, which the disciples erroneously interpreted of a glorious temporal kingdom, which they continued to expect him to erect. And it must be acknowledged, that the manner in which Luke introduces his account of this dispute here, favours this interpretation of the passage. For, immediately after he had informed us of the disciples beginning to inquire among themselves which of them it was that should betray Christ, he proceeds to say, And there was also a strife among them which of them should be accounted the greatest. Be this as it may, if it really was a third contention of the same sort with those which had occurred before, it appears that Christ composed it by the arguments which he had made use of for the same end formerly. For, he said unto them, The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them, &c. — Among the Gentiles, they are reckoned the greatest men who have the greatest power, and who exercise it in the most absolute manner. Such, however, have at times affected the pompous title of benefactors, (euragetai, a surname which some of the kings of Egypt and Syria assumed,) and thereby have tacitly acknowledged that true greatness consists in goodness. But your greatness shall not be like theirs; shall not consist in temporal power over your fellow-creatures, or in honour or dignity among them, though it should be joined with an affectation of titles which denote qualities truly honourable. Whosoever desires to be great among you, let him be so by his humility and by his serviceableness to the rest, in imitation of me, your Master, whose greatness consists in this, that I am become the servant of you all. He that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger — According to the manner of the Jews, the aged expected great service and submission from the young; and he that is chief — He that presides over the rest in any office of peculiar trust and influence; as he that doth serve — Let him be as humble and condescending as the servant. For whether is greater — Which of the two is naturally accounted greater by a stranger who happens to come in; he that sitteth at meat, or he that serveth? — That stands and waits upon the guests? Is not he that sitteth at meat? — Accounted greater? But I am among you as he that serveth — These words may, no doubt, have a respect to the whole of Christ’s life; yet they seem to refer more particularly to his having lately washed the disciples’ feet, as John informs us, John 13:14. See notes on Matthew 20:25, 28. “It seems to have been our Lord’s view,” says Dr. Campbell, “in these instructions, not only to check in his apostles all ambition of power, and every thing which savoured of a desire of superiority and dominion over their brethren; but also to restrain that species of vanity which is near akin to it, the affectation of distinction from titles of respect and dignity. Against this vice particularly the clause under consideration seems to be levelled. The reflection naturally suggested by it is, How little are any, the most pompous epithets which men can bestow, worthy the regard of a good man, who observes how vilely, through servility and flattery, they are sometimes prostituted on the most undeserving.”

§ 122. AMBITIOUS STRIFE AMONG THE TWELVE, 24-30.

24. There was also a strife—This was when they first took seats at the table, as above remarked, verse 14. This was in all probability a strife now awakened for the couch of honour. The strife would most likely be between Peter, James, and John. But even in the lower ranks there may have been a strife for a higher relative place.

V. 25. They that exercise the most arbitrary authority over them, have from their flatterers the vain title of benefactors.

Verse 25. Are called benefactors.] The very Greek word used by the evangelist, euergetai, was the surname of some of the Ptolemies of Egypt; Ptolemy Euergetes, i.e. the Benefactor. It was a custom among the ancient Romans to distribute part of the lands which they had conquered on the frontiers of the empire to their soldiers; those who enjoyed such lands were called beneficiarii, beneficed persons; and the lands themselves were termed beneficia, benefices, as being held on the beneficence of the sovereign; and it is no wonder that such sovereigns, however tyrannical or oppressive they might have been in other respects, were termed benefactors by those who were thus dependent on their bounty.

Verses 24-27. And there was also a strife among them, &c. — Of the kind of contentions here spoken of there are two instances recorded by the evangelists, evidently different from each other, and each attended with very different circumstances. The former is mentioned by Matthew 18:1-4; by Mark 9:33-37; and by Luke 9:46. This certainly is not that here referred to. The other, recorded Matthew 20:20, &c.; and Mark 10:35, &c., is thought, by most commentators, to be that which Luke here speaks of. See the notes on these two last mentioned passages. Some, however, are of opinion, that a third contention of a similar kind arose among the disciples, at this last paschal supper which our Lord ate with them; and that it arose from some expressions which he dropped respecting the glory of his heavenly kingdom, which the disciples erroneously interpreted of a glorious temporal kingdom, which they continued to expect him to erect. And it must be acknowledged, that the manner in which Luke introduces his account of this dispute here, favours this interpretation of the passage. For, immediately after he had informed us of the disciples beginning to inquire among themselves which of them it was that should betray Christ, he proceeds to say, And there was also a strife among them which of them should be accounted the greatest. Be this as it may, if it really was a third contention of the same sort with those which had occurred before, it appears that Christ composed it by the arguments which he had made use of for the same end formerly. For, he said unto them, The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them, &c. — Among the Gentiles, they are reckoned the greatest men who have the greatest power, and who exercise it in the most absolute manner. Such, however, have at times affected the pompous title of benefactors, (euragetai, a surname which some of the kings of Egypt and Syria assumed,) and thereby have tacitly acknowledged that true greatness consists in goodness. But your greatness shall not be like theirs; shall not consist in temporal power over your fellow-creatures, or in honour or dignity among them, though it should be joined with an affectation of titles which denote qualities truly honourable. Whosoever desires to be great among you, let him be so by his humility and by his serviceableness to the rest, in imitation of me, your Master, whose greatness consists in this, that I am become the servant of you all. He that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger — According to the manner of the Jews, the aged expected great service and submission from the young; and he that is chief — He that presides over the rest in any office of peculiar trust and influence; as he that doth serve — Let him be as humble and condescending as the servant. For whether is greater — Which of the two is naturally accounted greater by a stranger who happens to come in; he that sitteth at meat, or he that serveth? — That stands and waits upon the guests? Is not he that sitteth at meat? — Accounted greater? But I am among you as he that serveth — These words may, no doubt, have a respect to the whole of Christ’s life; yet they seem to refer more particularly to his having lately washed the disciples’ feet, as John informs us, John 13:14. See notes on Matthew 20:25, 28. “It seems to have been our Lord’s view,” says Dr. Campbell, “in these instructions, not only to check in his apostles all ambition of power, and every thing which savoured of a desire of superiority and dominion over their brethren; but also to restrain that species of vanity which is near akin to it, the affectation of distinction from titles of respect and dignity. Against this vice particularly the clause under consideration seems to be levelled. The reflection naturally suggested by it is, How little are any, the most pompous epithets which men can bestow, worthy the regard of a good man, who observes how vilely, through servility and flattery, they are sometimes prostituted on the most undeserving.”

Ver. 25. The kings of the gentiles exercise lordship. Matthew 20:26.

25. Exercise lordship—Play the lord and despot. Jesus here does not condemn the exercise of a just governmental authority, in which the ruler, acting for the public good, is in fact the public servant. On the contrary, the powers that be are ordained of God. Rulers are a necessity in all human society. But every true ruler, whether in Church or State, is a true and faithful servant, both of God and of the people he rules. They that exercise authority… benefactors—The most despotic tyrants and the bloodiest destroyers are often the themes of human eulogy. Benefactors—The Greek title here named, Euergetes, was conferred upon or adopted by several of the Egyptian Ptolemies, who were anything but benefactors to their nation or race.

V. 26. But ye are to be benefactors to mankind, not by governing, but by serving.

Verse 26. Let him be as the younger] Dr. Lightfoot justly conjectures that Peter was the eldest of all the disciples; and he supposes that the strife was kindled between him and the sons of Zebedee, James and John. These three disciples were those whom Christ had distinguished by peculiar marks of his favour; and therefore it is natural to conclude that the strife lay between these three, the two brothers and Peter. Shall we or Peter be at the head? Neither, says our Lord. Let him, Peter, who is chief (o meizwn, the eldest) among you, be as, John, o newterov, the younger. The younger part of the disciples do not appear to have taken any part in this contention; and our Lord shows Peter, and the sons of Zebedee, that they must be as unambitious as the younger in order to be acknowledged as his disciples. Dr. Lightfoot thinks that Peter was the mover of this strife, and therefore our Lord rebukes him by name.

Verses 24-27. And there was also a strife among them, &c. — Of the kind of contentions here spoken of there are two instances recorded by the evangelists, evidently different from each other, and each attended with very different circumstances. The former is mentioned by Matthew 18:1-4; by Mark 9:33-37; and by Luke 9:46. This certainly is not that here referred to. The other, recorded Matthew 20:20, &c.; and Mark 10:35, &c., is thought, by most commentators, to be that which Luke here speaks of. See the notes on these two last mentioned passages. Some, however, are of opinion, that a third contention of a similar kind arose among the disciples, at this last paschal supper which our Lord ate with them; and that it arose from some expressions which he dropped respecting the glory of his heavenly kingdom, which the disciples erroneously interpreted of a glorious temporal kingdom, which they continued to expect him to erect. And it must be acknowledged, that the manner in which Luke introduces his account of this dispute here, favours this interpretation of the passage. For, immediately after he had informed us of the disciples beginning to inquire among themselves which of them it was that should betray Christ, he proceeds to say, And there was also a strife among them which of them should be accounted the greatest. Be this as it may, if it really was a third contention of the same sort with those which had occurred before, it appears that Christ composed it by the arguments which he had made use of for the same end formerly. For, he said unto them, The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them, &c. — Among the Gentiles, they are reckoned the greatest men who have the greatest power, and who exercise it in the most absolute manner. Such, however, have at times affected the pompous title of benefactors, (euragetai, a surname which some of the kings of Egypt and Syria assumed,) and thereby have tacitly acknowledged that true greatness consists in goodness. But your greatness shall not be like theirs; shall not consist in temporal power over your fellow-creatures, or in honour or dignity among them, though it should be joined with an affectation of titles which denote qualities truly honourable. Whosoever desires to be great among you, let him be so by his humility and by his serviceableness to the rest, in imitation of me, your Master, whose greatness consists in this, that I am become the servant of you all. He that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger — According to the manner of the Jews, the aged expected great service and submission from the young; and he that is chief — He that presides over the rest in any office of peculiar trust and influence; as he that doth serve — Let him be as humble and condescending as the servant. For whether is greater — Which of the two is naturally accounted greater by a stranger who happens to come in; he that sitteth at meat, or he that serveth? — That stands and waits upon the guests? Is not he that sitteth at meat? — Accounted greater? But I am among you as he that serveth — These words may, no doubt, have a respect to the whole of Christ’s life; yet they seem to refer more particularly to his having lately washed the disciples’ feet, as John informs us, John 13:14. See notes on Matthew 20:25, 28. “It seems to have been our Lord’s view,” says Dr. Campbell, “in these instructions, not only to check in his apostles all ambition of power, and every thing which savoured of a desire of superiority and dominion over their brethren; but also to restrain that species of vanity which is near akin to it, the affectation of distinction from titles of respect and dignity. Against this vice particularly the clause under consideration seems to be levelled. The reflection naturally suggested by it is, How little are any, the most pompous epithets which men can bestow, worthy the regard of a good man, who observes how vilely, through servility and flattery, they are sometimes prostituted on the most undeserving.”

26. Shall not be so—The spirit to be lords over God’s heritage, and not servants, shall not reign in your hearts. This does not condemn a true ecclesiastical order; but it does condemn all ecclesiastical ambition, and all aspiration after selfish power. Chief… doth verse—All office should be service. Every man should abdicate and disuse every authority over another which is not for the best good.

V. 27. For-This he proves by his own example.

I am in the midst of you-Just now: see with your eyes. I take no state upon me, but sit in the midst, on a level with the lowest of you.

Verses 24-27. And there was also a strife among them, &c. — Of the kind of contentions here spoken of there are two instances recorded by the evangelists, evidently different from each other, and each attended with very different circumstances. The former is mentioned by Matthew 18:1-4; by Mark 9:33-37; and by Luke 9:46. This certainly is not that here referred to. The other, recorded Matthew 20:20, &c.; and Mark 10:35, &c., is thought, by most commentators, to be that which Luke here speaks of. See the notes on these two last mentioned passages. Some, however, are of opinion, that a third contention of a similar kind arose among the disciples, at this last paschal supper which our Lord ate with them; and that it arose from some expressions which he dropped respecting the glory of his heavenly kingdom, which the disciples erroneously interpreted of a glorious temporal kingdom, which they continued to expect him to erect. And it must be acknowledged, that the manner in which Luke introduces his account of this dispute here, favours this interpretation of the passage. For, immediately after he had informed us of the disciples beginning to inquire among themselves which of them it was that should betray Christ, he proceeds to say, And there was also a strife among them which of them should be accounted the greatest. Be this as it may, if it really was a third contention of the same sort with those which had occurred before, it appears that Christ composed it by the arguments which he had made use of for the same end formerly. For, he said unto them, The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them, &c. — Among the Gentiles, they are reckoned the greatest men who have the greatest power, and who exercise it in the most absolute manner. Such, however, have at times affected the pompous title of benefactors, (euragetai, a surname which some of the kings of Egypt and Syria assumed,) and thereby have tacitly acknowledged that true greatness consists in goodness. But your greatness shall not be like theirs; shall not consist in temporal power over your fellow-creatures, or in honour or dignity among them, though it should be joined with an affectation of titles which denote qualities truly honourable. Whosoever desires to be great among you, let him be so by his humility and by his serviceableness to the rest, in imitation of me, your Master, whose greatness consists in this, that I am become the servant of you all. He that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger — According to the manner of the Jews, the aged expected great service and submission from the young; and he that is chief — He that presides over the rest in any office of peculiar trust and influence; as he that doth serve — Let him be as humble and condescending as the servant. For whether is greater — Which of the two is naturally accounted greater by a stranger who happens to come in; he that sitteth at meat, or he that serveth? — That stands and waits upon the guests? Is not he that sitteth at meat? — Accounted greater? But I am among you as he that serveth — These words may, no doubt, have a respect to the whole of Christ’s life; yet they seem to refer more particularly to his having lately washed the disciples’ feet, as John informs us, John 13:14. See notes on Matthew 20:25, 28. “It seems to have been our Lord’s view,” says Dr. Campbell, “in these instructions, not only to check in his apostles all ambition of power, and every thing which savoured of a desire of superiority and dominion over their brethren; but also to restrain that species of vanity which is near akin to it, the affectation of distinction from titles of respect and dignity. Against this vice particularly the clause under consideration seems to be levelled. The reflection naturally suggested by it is, How little are any, the most pompous epithets which men can bestow, worthy the regard of a good man, who observes how vilely, through servility and flattery, they are sometimes prostituted on the most undeserving.”

27. But I—Who am official Lord of you all. As he that serveth—Loving, suffering, and dying for the good of others.

V. 28. Ye have continued with me in my temptations-And all his life was nothing else, particularly from his entering on his public ministry.

Verses 28-30. Ye have continued with me in my temptations — En toiv peirasmoiv mou, in my trials and afflictions: and his whole life was little else than one continued series of them, particularly from the time of his entering on his public ministry. And I appoint unto you a kingdom — I will preserve you in all your temptations and trials here, and will confer on you a kingdom of glory hereafter: I appoint, not a primacy to one, but a kingdom to every one; and that on the same terms as my Father hath appointed to me — Who have fought and conquered. That ye may eat and drink at my table, &c. — That ye may enjoy the highest happiness as guests, not as servants, and the highest dignity, not as subjects, but as princes. Now as these honours, which I shall hereafter confer on you, are incomparably beyond those about which you seem so solicitous, let a consideration of this awaken a nobler ambition in your minds, than that which appears now to influence them; and, instead of contending for superiority over each other, in my church militant, in which you must expect to meet with continual reproach and suffering, aspire after high degrees of that celestial glory, which you are to share with me in my church triumphant. See on Matthew 19:28, 29. The words seem to be primarily applicable to the twelve apostles, and secondarily to all Christ’s servants and disciples, whose spiritual powers, honours, and delights, are here represented in figurative terms, with respect to their advancement both in the kingdom of grace and glory.

28. Ye are they—Our Lord now proceeds to show not only that he has no design to abolish a just authority, but that so dignified is the title and inheritance of every apostle that none need envy another. My temptations—My trials from Satan, men, and earthly things.

V. 29. And I-Will preserve you in all your temptations, till ye enter into the kingdom of glory:

appoint to you-By these very words. Not a primacy to one, but a kingdom to every one: on the same terms:

as my Father hath appointed to me-Who have fought and conquered.

Verse 29. I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me] The Codex Alexandrinus, with some other MSS., the later Syriac, and Origen, read in the first clause, diaqhkhn, a covenant. I appoint unto you a COVENANT, as my Father hath appointed unto me a kingdom:-Ye shall be ministers of the new covenant, as I am king in that spiritual kingdom to which it relates. This is a curious reading: but our Lord is probably to be understood as promising that they should get a kingdom-a state of blessedness, as he should get it-they must go through much tribulation in order to enter into the kingdom of God. So the Son of man suffered that he might enter into his glory: for the joy that was set before him, he endured the cross, and despised the shame, and is set down on the right hand of God.

Verses 28-30. Ye have continued with me in my temptations — En toiv peirasmoiv mou, in my trials and afflictions: and his whole life was little else than one continued series of them, particularly from the time of his entering on his public ministry. And I appoint unto you a kingdom — I will preserve you in all your temptations and trials here, and will confer on you a kingdom of glory hereafter: I appoint, not a primacy to one, but a kingdom to every one; and that on the same terms as my Father hath appointed to me — Who have fought and conquered. That ye may eat and drink at my table, &c. — That ye may enjoy the highest happiness as guests, not as servants, and the highest dignity, not as subjects, but as princes. Now as these honours, which I shall hereafter confer on you, are incomparably beyond those about which you seem so solicitous, let a consideration of this awaken a nobler ambition in your minds, than that which appears now to influence them; and, instead of contending for superiority over each other, in my church militant, in which you must expect to meet with continual reproach and suffering, aspire after high degrees of that celestial glory, which you are to share with me in my church triumphant. See on Matthew 19:28, 29. The words seem to be primarily applicable to the twelve apostles, and secondarily to all Christ’s servants and disciples, whose spiritual powers, honours, and delights, are here represented in figurative terms, with respect to their advancement both in the kingdom of grace and glory.

Ver. 29. I appoint, covenant, give, dispose, or prepare for you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed, or disposed to me a kingdom; that is, the mediatorial kingdom, and also the everlasting kingdom. What a gift at parting. Some, in regard of the feast at which these words were spoken, would read, “I grant you to eat bread at my table in my kingdom, seeing my Father hath given me a kingdom.”

29. I appoint—Literally, I bequeath, as if an inheritance after his death. A kingdom—A realm more powerful than any political kingdom; a royalty more dignified than any civil throne. This is the kingdom of the true Church, being a humble share in the mediatorial kingdom of Christ himself.

V. 30. That ye may eat and drink at my table-That is, that ye may enjoy the highest happiness, as guests, not as servants. These expressions seem to be primarily applicable to the twelve apostles, and secondarily, to all Christ's servants and disciples, whose spiritual powers, honours, and delights, are here represented in figurative terms, with respect to their advancement both in the kingdom of grace and of glory.

Verse 30. Sit on thrones] See Clarke on “Matthew 19:28”. Marcion left the whole of this verse out, according to Epiphanius: probably because he did not understand it.

Verses 28-30. Ye have continued with me in my temptations — En toiv peirasmoiv mou, in my trials and afflictions: and his whole life was little else than one continued series of them, particularly from the time of his entering on his public ministry. And I appoint unto you a kingdom — I will preserve you in all your temptations and trials here, and will confer on you a kingdom of glory hereafter: I appoint, not a primacy to one, but a kingdom to every one; and that on the same terms as my Father hath appointed to me — Who have fought and conquered. That ye may eat and drink at my table, &c. — That ye may enjoy the highest happiness as guests, not as servants, and the highest dignity, not as subjects, but as princes. Now as these honours, which I shall hereafter confer on you, are incomparably beyond those about which you seem so solicitous, let a consideration of this awaken a nobler ambition in your minds, than that which appears now to influence them; and, instead of contending for superiority over each other, in my church militant, in which you must expect to meet with continual reproach and suffering, aspire after high degrees of that celestial glory, which you are to share with me in my church triumphant. See on Matthew 19:28, 29. The words seem to be primarily applicable to the twelve apostles, and secondarily to all Christ’s servants and disciples, whose spiritual powers, honours, and delights, are here represented in figurative terms, with respect to their advancement both in the kingdom of grace and glory.

30. Eat… at my [sacramental] table—Which is the antepast and emblem of the eternal banquet when the family all get home. In my kingdom—First of grace, and then of glory. Sit on apostolic thrones. Truly the throne of the apostle was higher than any of the thrones of earth. Judging—Ruling. The judges of the book of Judges were civil rulers and military leaders. The apostles ruled in the Church with divine authority while they lived. They still rule in the Church whose laws their labors first established. Twelve tribes of Israel—The type of the Church of God. This passage fully shows that the apostles were twelve in special reference to the twelve tribes. See notes on Matthew 19:28, 29.

V. 31. Satan hath desired to have you-My apostles, that he might sift you as wheat-Try you to the uttermost.

Verse 31. Simon, Simon] When a name is thus repeated in the sacred writings, it appears to be always intended as an expression of love, manifested by a warning voice. As if he had said, While thou and the others are contending for supremacy, Satan is endeavouring to destroy you all: but I have prayed for thee, as being in most danger.

Satan hath desired-you] That is, all the apostles, but particularly the three contenders: the plural pronoun, umav, sufficiently proves that these words were not addressed to Peter alone. Satan had already got one, Judas; he had nearly got another, Peter; and he wished to have all. But we see by this that the devil cannot even tempt a man unless he receive permission. He desires to do all evil; he is permitted only to do some.

Verses 31-34. And the Lord said, &c. — To make his disciples humble and watchful, and kindly affectionate one to another, Christ assured them, that Satan was seeking to destroy them all by his temptations. As if he had said, O Simon, Simon, behold Satan — As in the case of Job; (Job 2:4, 5;) hath desired to have you — My apostles, exhthsato umav, hath required you, or sought you out; or requested permission, as Dr. Campbell translates it; to sift you as wheat — To assault you by furious and violent temptations, or to try you to the uttermost. I must assure thee, therefore, that an hour of terrible trial is just at hand, which will press harder than thou art aware, on thee and all thy companions here. But I — Forseeing the danger to which thou, Peter, wilt be peculiarly exposed, I have graciously prevented thee with my watchful care; and have prayed for thee — For thou wilt be in the greatest danger of all my disciples; in order that thy faith fail not — Altogether. And when thou art converted — Renewed to repentance, or hast returned to thy duty, as epistreyav may be rendered; when thou art recovered from thy fall, and confirmed again in faith and holiness; strengthen thy brethren — All that are weak in faith, or shaken in mind by the approaching trial, and ready to relinquish the service they have undertaken. When thou art recovered by the grace of God, do what thou canst to recover others; when thy own faith is strengthened, labour to confirm the faith of others, and to establish them; when thou hast found mercy, encourage others to hope that they also shall find it. And do thine utmost, all the remainder of thy days, by word and deed, to engage all, over whom thou hast any influence, to a steady adherence to my cause in the midst of the greatest difficulties, and especially by setting them an example of eminent faith and fortitude. And he said, Lord, I am ready to go with thee to prison and to death — So Peter thought at this time: and such was his present intention and resolution; but he was not sufficiently acquainted with himself, nor aware of his own weakness. See on Matthew 26:33-35. And he saith, I tell thee, Peter — I most assuredly say unto thee; the cock shall not crow this day — Or rather, it shall not be the time of cock-crowing to-day, see on Mark 14:39; before thou shalt thrice deny that thou knowest me — And shalt solemnly disclaim all regard to me. So terrified shalt thou be at the faces of these enemies whom thou now defiest. In other words, notwithstanding thy pretended affection and fortitude, a few hours shall not pass till, in great consternation at the dangers with which I and my disciples shall be threatened, thou shalt basely deny, three several times, that thou art my disciple. Peter therefore had no reason to be elated, though on a former occasion he had confessed Jesus to be the Son of God. And his behaviour in this instance affords a very affecting example of human vanity, in the midst of the greatest weakness.

Ver. 31. Simon, Simon, Satan hath desired to have you. From the sacred scriptures we everywhere learn, that Satan could hurt neither Job nor Peter, nor any saint, without the divine permission. Christ was privy to that permission, being in his divine nature associate in the council of the Godhead. He therefore prayed for Peter, that his faith and courage might not fail. When Satan is permitted to tempt a man, he will try and sift him to the extent of his commission. Our Lord forewarns and foreärms men against the day of trial. He showed Peter his glory on the mount, he warned him of his fall, he capitulated with the multitude that his disciples should go their way; and here he told Peter that he prayed for him that his faith should not fail. Hence there was no absolute necessity that Peter should fall; the prediction that he should thrice deny his Master was no more positive than the sentence against Ahab, Hezekiah, and Nineveh. But at the same time let the converted backslider strengthen his brethren: he is under a thousand obligations so to do.

§ 125. JESUS FOREWARNS PETER, 31-38.

31. Simon, Simon—Peter had probably had his full share in the contention just mentioned; and our Lord here addresses him with a most solemn emphasis by his old natural name, in distinction from his new name of Peter. Hath desired—In the Greek (ezhthsato) has asked that you be surrendered over to him, as Job was surrendered to this same Satan. So Philip of Macedon demanded of the Athenians to surrender his enemy, Demosthenes, over to him. Demosthenes, in relating the fact, adopts the very word here used by our Lord.

V. 32. But I have prayed for thee-Who wilt be in the greatest danger of all:

that thy faith fail not-Altogether:

and when thou art returned-From thy flight,

strengthen thy brethren-All that are weak in faith; perhaps scandalized at thy fall.

Verse 32. I have prayed for thee] From the natural forwardness and impetuosity of thy own spirit, thou wilt be brought into the most imminent danger; but I have supplicated for thee, that thy faith may not utterly fail-ekleiph, from ek, out, and leipw, I fail, to fall utterly or entirely off. Peter’s faith did fail, but not utterly: he did fall, but he did not fall off, apostatize, or forsake his Master and his cause finally, as Judas did. Every body sees, from Peter’s denial of his Lord, that his faith did fail, and his great courage too; and yet they read, in the common translation, that Christ prayed that it might not fail: can they then conceive that our Lord’s prayer was heard? The translation which I have given above removes this embarrassment and apparent contradiction. It was certainly Peter’s advantage that our Lord did pray for him; but it was not so much for his honour that he should stand in need of such a prayer, beyond all others. Lightfoot.

When thou art converted] Restored to a sense of thy folly and sin, and to me and my cause-establish these thy brethren. All the disciples forsook Jesus and fled, merely through fear of losing their lives; Peter, who continued for a while near him, denied his Master with oaths, and repeated this thrice: our Lord seems to intimate that, after this fall, Peter would become more cautious and circumspect than ever; and that he should become uncommonly strong in the faith, which was the case; and that, notwithstanding the baseness of his past conduct, he should be a proper instrument for strengthening the feeble minded, and supporting the weak. His two epistles to the persecuted Christians show how well he was qualified for this important work.

Verses 31-34. And the Lord said, &c. — To make his disciples humble and watchful, and kindly affectionate one to another, Christ assured them, that Satan was seeking to destroy them all by his temptations. As if he had said, O Simon, Simon, behold Satan — As in the case of Job; (Job 2:4, 5;) hath desired to have you — My apostles, exhthsato umav, hath required you, or sought you out; or requested permission, as Dr. Campbell translates it; to sift you as wheat — To assault you by furious and violent temptations, or to try you to the uttermost. I must assure thee, therefore, that an hour of terrible trial is just at hand, which will press harder than thou art aware, on thee and all thy companions here. But I — Forseeing the danger to which thou, Peter, wilt be peculiarly exposed, I have graciously prevented thee with my watchful care; and have prayed for thee — For thou wilt be in the greatest danger of all my disciples; in order that thy faith fail not — Altogether. And when thou art converted — Renewed to repentance, or hast returned to thy duty, as epistreyav may be rendered; when thou art recovered from thy fall, and confirmed again in faith and holiness; strengthen thy brethren — All that are weak in faith, or shaken in mind by the approaching trial, and ready to relinquish the service they have undertaken. When thou art recovered by the grace of God, do what thou canst to recover others; when thy own faith is strengthened, labour to confirm the faith of others, and to establish them; when thou hast found mercy, encourage others to hope that they also shall find it. And do thine utmost, all the remainder of thy days, by word and deed, to engage all, over whom thou hast any influence, to a steady adherence to my cause in the midst of the greatest difficulties, and especially by setting them an example of eminent faith and fortitude. And he said, Lord, I am ready to go with thee to prison and to death — So Peter thought at this time: and such was his present intention and resolution; but he was not sufficiently acquainted with himself, nor aware of his own weakness. See on Matthew 26:33-35. And he saith, I tell thee, Peter — I most assuredly say unto thee; the cock shall not crow this day — Or rather, it shall not be the time of cock-crowing to-day, see on Mark 14:39; before thou shalt thrice deny that thou knowest me — And shalt solemnly disclaim all regard to me. So terrified shalt thou be at the faces of these enemies whom thou now defiest. In other words, notwithstanding thy pretended affection and fortitude, a few hours shall not pass till, in great consternation at the dangers with which I and my disciples shall be threatened, thou shalt basely deny, three several times, that thou art my disciple. Peter therefore had no reason to be elated, though on a former occasion he had confessed Jesus to be the Son of God. And his behaviour in this instance affords a very affecting example of human vanity, in the midst of the greatest weakness.

32. Prayed that thy faith fail not—His faith should falter, though it did not finally fail. His faith doubtless ceased to be justifying, though it remained convicting; at least so far as to form the basis of a true repentance. Converted—From the apostacy. That re-conversion he doubtless needed to save him from damnation. The salvation of an old conversion will not survive a complete apostacy. A new repentance, faith, and conversion are necessary. Strengthen thy brethren—Who will have been shaken and enfeebled by thy apostacy. Alford says that the use three times, in Peter’s epistles, of this word strengthened is at least remarkable. He who by sin disgraces the cause of Christ, should doubly honour it by a redoubled effort to prevent others from like folly.

The new responsibilities of the Apostles, 35-38.

In this paragraph our Lord shows his apostles how his departure will leave them very much to their own resources. During his stay on earth his divine care had equipped and guarded them in the travel and the battle. But now they must set up on their own account and provide their own resources.

Verses 31-34. And the Lord said, &c. — To make his disciples humble and watchful, and kindly affectionate one to another, Christ assured them, that Satan was seeking to destroy them all by his temptations. As if he had said, O Simon, Simon, behold Satan — As in the case of Job; (Job 2:4, 5;) hath desired to have you — My apostles, exhthsato umav, hath required you, or sought you out; or requested permission, as Dr. Campbell translates it; to sift you as wheat — To assault you by furious and violent temptations, or to try you to the uttermost. I must assure thee, therefore, that an hour of terrible trial is just at hand, which will press harder than thou art aware, on thee and all thy companions here. But I — Forseeing the danger to which thou, Peter, wilt be peculiarly exposed, I have graciously prevented thee with my watchful care; and have prayed for thee — For thou wilt be in the greatest danger of all my disciples; in order that thy faith fail not — Altogether. And when thou art converted — Renewed to repentance, or hast returned to thy duty, as epistreyav may be rendered; when thou art recovered from thy fall, and confirmed again in faith and holiness; strengthen thy brethren — All that are weak in faith, or shaken in mind by the approaching trial, and ready to relinquish the service they have undertaken. When thou art recovered by the grace of God, do what thou canst to recover others; when thy own faith is strengthened, labour to confirm the faith of others, and to establish them; when thou hast found mercy, encourage others to hope that they also shall find it. And do thine utmost, all the remainder of thy days, by word and deed, to engage all, over whom thou hast any influence, to a steady adherence to my cause in the midst of the greatest difficulties, and especially by setting them an example of eminent faith and fortitude. And he said, Lord, I am ready to go with thee to prison and to death — So Peter thought at this time: and such was his present intention and resolution; but he was not sufficiently acquainted with himself, nor aware of his own weakness. See on Matthew 26:33-35. And he saith, I tell thee, Peter — I most assuredly say unto thee; the cock shall not crow this day — Or rather, it shall not be the time of cock-crowing to-day, see on Mark 14:39; before thou shalt thrice deny that thou knowest me — And shalt solemnly disclaim all regard to me. So terrified shalt thou be at the faces of these enemies whom thou now defiest. In other words, notwithstanding thy pretended affection and fortitude, a few hours shall not pass till, in great consternation at the dangers with which I and my disciples shall be threatened, thou shalt basely deny, three several times, that thou art my disciple. Peter therefore had no reason to be elated, though on a former occasion he had confessed Jesus to be the Son of God. And his behaviour in this instance affords a very affecting example of human vanity, in the midst of the greatest weakness.

§ 125. JESUS FOREWARNS PETER, 31-38.

31. Simon, Simon—Peter had probably had his full share in the contention just mentioned; and our Lord here addresses him with a most solemn emphasis by his old natural name, in distinction from his new name of Peter. Hath desired—In the Greek (ezhthsato) has asked that you be surrendered over to him, as Job was surrendered to this same Satan. So Philip of Macedon demanded of the Athenians to surrender his enemy, Demosthenes, over to him. Demosthenes, in relating the fact, adopts the very word here used by our Lord.

V. 34. It shall not be the time of cock crowing this day-The common time of cock crowing (which is usually about three in the morning) probably did not come till after the cock which Peter heard had crowed twice, if not oftener.

Verse 34. The cock shall not crow this day] Matthew 26:34, and Mark 14:30, say, this night; both expressions are right, because the Jewish day, of twenty-four hours, began with the evening, and ended at the evening of the following day. On Peter’s denial, see the notes on Matthew 26:31-35.

Verses 31-34. And the Lord said, &c. — To make his disciples humble and watchful, and kindly affectionate one to another, Christ assured them, that Satan was seeking to destroy them all by his temptations. As if he had said, O Simon, Simon, behold Satan — As in the case of Job; (Job 2:4, 5;) hath desired to have you — My apostles, exhthsato umav, hath required you, or sought you out; or requested permission, as Dr. Campbell translates it; to sift you as wheat — To assault you by furious and violent temptations, or to try you to the uttermost. I must assure thee, therefore, that an hour of terrible trial is just at hand, which will press harder than thou art aware, on thee and all thy companions here. But I — Forseeing the danger to which thou, Peter, wilt be peculiarly exposed, I have graciously prevented thee with my watchful care; and have prayed for thee — For thou wilt be in the greatest danger of all my disciples; in order that thy faith fail not — Altogether. And when thou art converted — Renewed to repentance, or hast returned to thy duty, as epistreyav may be rendered; when thou art recovered from thy fall, and confirmed again in faith and holiness; strengthen thy brethren — All that are weak in faith, or shaken in mind by the approaching trial, and ready to relinquish the service they have undertaken. When thou art recovered by the grace of God, do what thou canst to recover others; when thy own faith is strengthened, labour to confirm the faith of others, and to establish them; when thou hast found mercy, encourage others to hope that they also shall find it. And do thine utmost, all the remainder of thy days, by word and deed, to engage all, over whom thou hast any influence, to a steady adherence to my cause in the midst of the greatest difficulties, and especially by setting them an example of eminent faith and fortitude. And he said, Lord, I am ready to go with thee to prison and to death — So Peter thought at this time: and such was his present intention and resolution; but he was not sufficiently acquainted with himself, nor aware of his own weakness. See on Matthew 26:33-35. And he saith, I tell thee, Peter — I most assuredly say unto thee; the cock shall not crow this day — Or rather, it shall not be the time of cock-crowing to-day, see on Mark 14:39; before thou shalt thrice deny that thou knowest me — And shalt solemnly disclaim all regard to me. So terrified shalt thou be at the faces of these enemies whom thou now defiest. In other words, notwithstanding thy pretended affection and fortitude, a few hours shall not pass till, in great consternation at the dangers with which I and my disciples shall be threatened, thou shalt basely deny, three several times, that thou art my disciple. Peter therefore had no reason to be elated, though on a former occasion he had confessed Jesus to be the Son of God. And his behaviour in this instance affords a very affecting example of human vanity, in the midst of the greatest weakness.

§ 125. JESUS FOREWARNS PETER, 31-38.

31. Simon, Simon—Peter had probably had his full share in the contention just mentioned; and our Lord here addresses him with a most solemn emphasis by his old natural name, in distinction from his new name of Peter. Hath desired—In the Greek (ezhthsato) has asked that you be surrendered over to him, as Job was surrendered to this same Satan. So Philip of Macedon demanded of the Athenians to surrender his enemy, Demosthenes, over to him. Demosthenes, in relating the fact, adopts the very word here used by our Lord.

V. 35. When I sent you-lacked ye any thing-Were ye not borne above all want and danger?

Verse 35. When I sent you without purse] See the notes on Matthew 10:9, 10.

Verses 35-37. And he said, When I sent you without purse, &c. — “Our Lord, having finished what he had to say to Peter in particular, now turned to the other disciples, and put them in mind how they had been prohibited, when they were first sent out, to make any provision for their journey, and directed to rely wholly on God; and that, though they had accordingly gone away without purse, scrip, and shoes, they had never wanted any thing, but had had abundant provision made for them by the kindness of men whom God had disposed to befriend them: but he told them that matters were now altered; they were to be violently assaulted by their enemies, were to meet with the strongest temptations, and to be so hotly persecuted by their countrymen, that they could no longer expect any succour at their hands; for which reason, he ordered them in their future journeys to provide money, and clothes, and swords for themselves: that is, besides relying on the Divine Providence, as formerly, they were to use all prudent precautions in fortifying themselves against the trials that were coming on them.” — Macknight. Or rather, these commands to arm themselves against dangers, are to be considered merely as predictions and warnings given them of the dangers and trials they were to meet with. For the predictions of the prophets are often announced under the form of commands. Thus Isaiah, foretelling the destruction of the family of the king of Babylon, Isaiah 14:21, says, Prepare slaughter for his children, &c. And Jeremiah, foretelling in like manner the destruction of the Jews, exhibits God as thus addressing them, Jeremiah 9:17, 18, Call for the mourning women, &c. And in the prophecy of Ezekiel (Ezekiel 39:17- 19) and in the Apocalypse (Revelation 19:17, 18) this allegoric spirit is carried so far, that orders are given to brute animals to do what the prophet means only to foretel they would do. For this prophecy that is written, must yet be accomplished — As all the other predictions of the prophets concerning me must also be: and he was numbered with the transgressors — Prepare, therefore, to meet a most violent persecution; for I, your Leader, am to be treated as a malefactor, and of course you, my followers, will not escape suffering. Nor are these trials at a distance, they are just at hand. For the things which are written concerning me have an end — Are now drawing to a period, are upon the point of being accomplished. And they said, Behold, here are two swords — Our Lord’s disciples, mistaking his meaning about the swords, replied, they had two: the reason why they had any at all, probably, was, that they might defend themselves against robbers in their journey from Galilee and Perea; and from the beasts of prey, which in those parts were very frequent, and dangerous in the night-time: And he said unto them, It is enough — To show them their mistake, he told them that two swords were sufficient, which it is evident they could not have been for so many men, had he meant what he said in a literal sense. He only meant, This will be a time of extreme danger; to meet which, it will be necessary to be prepared by faith, fortitude, and patience.

35. Purse… scrip—The means, figuratively, of conducting their ministry. Nothing—They had been like children for whom the parent cared and provided.

V. 36. But now-You will be quite in another situation. You will want every thing.

He that hath no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one-It is plain, this is not to be taken literally. It only means, This will be a time of extreme danger.

Verse 36. He that hath no sword] Bishop PEARCE supposes that the word macairan, sword, has been inserted here from what is said in Luke 22:38, as it is evident our Lord never intended to make any resistance, or to suffer a sword to be used on the occasion; see Matthew 26:52. The word stands rather oddly in the passage: the verse, translated in the order in which it stands, is as follows: And he who hath none, let him sell his garment and buy-a sword. Now it is plain that the verb pwlhsatw, let him buy, may be referred to phran a scrip, in the former part of the verse: therefore if, according to the bishop’s opinion, the word sword be omitted, the passage may be understood thus: “When I sent you out before, Luke 10:1, &c., I intended you to continue itinerants only for a few days, and to preach the Gospel only to your country-men; therefore you had but little need of a staff, purse, or scrip, as your journey was neither long, nor expensive; but now I am about to send you into all the world, to preach the Gospel to every creature; and, as ye shall be generally hated and persecuted for my sake, ye shall have need to make every prudent provision for your journey; and so necessary will it be for you to provide yourselves victuals, &c., for your passage through your inhospitable country, that, if any of you have no scrip or wallet, he should sell even his upper garment to provide one.” Others, who are for retaining the word sword, think that it was a proverbial expression, intimating a time of great difficulty and danger, and that now the disciples had need to look to themselves, for his murderers were at hand. The reader will observe that these words were spoken to the disciples just before he went to the garden of Gethsemane, and that the danger was now so very near that there could be no time for any of them to go and sell his garment in order to purchase a sword to defend himself and his Master from the attack of the Jewish mob. Judea was at this time, as we have already noticed, much infested by robbers: while our Lord was with his disciples, they were perfectly safe, being shielded by his miraculous power. Shortly they must go into every part of the land, and will need weapons to defend themselves against wild beasts, and to intimidate wicked men, who, if they found them totally defenceless, would not hesitate to make them their prey, or take away their life. However the matter may be understood, we may rest satisfied that these swords were neither to be considered as offensive weapons, nor instruments to propagate the truth. The genius and spirit of the Christian religion is equally against both. Perhaps, in this counsel of our Lord, he refers to the contention about supremacy: as if he had said, Instead of contending among yourselves about who shall be the greatest, ye have more need to unite yourselves against the common enemy, who are now at hand: this counsel was calculated to show them the necessity of union among themselves, as their enemies were both numerous and powerful.

Verses 35-37. And he said, When I sent you without purse, &c. — “Our Lord, having finished what he had to say to Peter in particular, now turned to the other disciples, and put them in mind how they had been prohibited, when they were first sent out, to make any provision for their journey, and directed to rely wholly on God; and that, though they had accordingly gone away without purse, scrip, and shoes, they had never wanted any thing, but had had abundant provision made for them by the kindness of men whom God had disposed to befriend them: but he told them that matters were now altered; they were to be violently assaulted by their enemies, were to meet with the strongest temptations, and to be so hotly persecuted by their countrymen, that they could no longer expect any succour at their hands; for which reason, he ordered them in their future journeys to provide money, and clothes, and swords for themselves: that is, besides relying on the Divine Providence, as formerly, they were to use all prudent precautions in fortifying themselves against the trials that were coming on them.” — Macknight. Or rather, these commands to arm themselves against dangers, are to be considered merely as predictions and warnings given them of the dangers and trials they were to meet with. For the predictions of the prophets are often announced under the form of commands. Thus Isaiah, foretelling the destruction of the family of the king of Babylon, Isaiah 14:21, says, Prepare slaughter for his children, &c. And Jeremiah, foretelling in like manner the destruction of the Jews, exhibits God as thus addressing them, Jeremiah 9:17, 18, Call for the mourning women, &c. And in the prophecy of Ezekiel (Ezekiel 39:17- 19) and in the Apocalypse (Revelation 19:17, 18) this allegoric spirit is carried so far, that orders are given to brute animals to do what the prophet means only to foretel they would do. For this prophecy that is written, must yet be accomplished — As all the other predictions of the prophets concerning me must also be: and he was numbered with the transgressors — Prepare, therefore, to meet a most violent persecution; for I, your Leader, am to be treated as a malefactor, and of course you, my followers, will not escape suffering. Nor are these trials at a distance, they are just at hand. For the things which are written concerning me have an end — Are now drawing to a period, are upon the point of being accomplished. And they said, Behold, here are two swords — Our Lord’s disciples, mistaking his meaning about the swords, replied, they had two: the reason why they had any at all, probably, was, that they might defend themselves against robbers in their journey from Galilee and Perea; and from the beasts of prey, which in those parts were very frequent, and dangerous in the night-time: And he said unto them, It is enough — To show them their mistake, he told them that two swords were sufficient, which it is evident they could not have been for so many men, had he meant what he said in a literal sense. He only meant, This will be a time of extreme danger; to meet which, it will be necessary to be prepared by faith, fortitude, and patience.

36. But now—Childhood is past, and the divine order is, that your powers be developed into the efficiency of manhood. You are like adventurers that must go forth to travel and battle upon your own resources. He that hath— Whatever of means or instrumentalities you have got, cultivate and put them to strenuous use. He that hath no sword—Who finds himself unfurnished for the combat that may come. Sell his garment—For let him be well assured that the battle is sure to come, and that victory is of more value to him than the garment upon his back.

V. 37. The things which are written concerning me have an end-Are now drawing to a period; are upon the point of being accomplished. Isaiah 53:12.

Verse 37. Must yet be accomplished] Probably meaning that, though this prophecy did refer to some particular matter in the time of the prophet, yet it farther (eti) related to Christ, and could not have its complete accomplishment but in his crucifixion as a criminal.

For the things concerning me have an end.] As if he had said, My work is now almost done; yours is only beginning; I am now about to be crucified and numbered with the transgressors; think what will be done to you, and what ought to be done by you; and then think if this be a time for you to be contending with each other. Lightfoot.

Verses 35-37. And he said, When I sent you without purse, &c. — “Our Lord, having finished what he had to say to Peter in particular, now turned to the other disciples, and put them in mind how they had been prohibited, when they were first sent out, to make any provision for their journey, and directed to rely wholly on God; and that, though they had accordingly gone away without purse, scrip, and shoes, they had never wanted any thing, but had had abundant provision made for them by the kindness of men whom God had disposed to befriend them: but he told them that matters were now altered; they were to be violently assaulted by their enemies, were to meet with the strongest temptations, and to be so hotly persecuted by their countrymen, that they could no longer expect any succour at their hands; for which reason, he ordered them in their future journeys to provide money, and clothes, and swords for themselves: that is, besides relying on the Divine Providence, as formerly, they were to use all prudent precautions in fortifying themselves against the trials that were coming on them.” — Macknight. Or rather, these commands to arm themselves against dangers, are to be considered merely as predictions and warnings given them of the dangers and trials they were to meet with. For the predictions of the prophets are often announced under the form of commands. Thus Isaiah, foretelling the destruction of the family of the king of Babylon, Isaiah 14:21, says, Prepare slaughter for his children, &c. And Jeremiah, foretelling in like manner the destruction of the Jews, exhibits God as thus addressing them, Jeremiah 9:17, 18, Call for the mourning women, &c. And in the prophecy of Ezekiel (Ezekiel 39:17- 19) and in the Apocalypse (Revelation 19:17, 18) this allegoric spirit is carried so far, that orders are given to brute animals to do what the prophet means only to foretel they would do. For this prophecy that is written, must yet be accomplished — As all the other predictions of the prophets concerning me must also be: and he was numbered with the transgressors — Prepare, therefore, to meet a most violent persecution; for I, your Leader, am to be treated as a malefactor, and of course you, my followers, will not escape suffering. Nor are these trials at a distance, they are just at hand. For the things which are written concerning me have an end — Are now drawing to a period, are upon the point of being accomplished. And they said, Behold, here are two swords — Our Lord’s disciples, mistaking his meaning about the swords, replied, they had two: the reason why they had any at all, probably, was, that they might defend themselves against robbers in their journey from Galilee and Perea; and from the beasts of prey, which in those parts were very frequent, and dangerous in the night-time: And he said unto them, It is enough — To show them their mistake, he told them that two swords were sufficient, which it is evident they could not have been for so many men, had he meant what he said in a literal sense. He only meant, This will be a time of extreme danger; to meet which, it will be necessary to be prepared by faith, fortitude, and patience.

Ver. 37. The things concerning me have an end; that is, all the prophecies concerning my sufferings have their accomplishment in my exit from the world.

37. For… must yet be accomplished—The event which takes me away from you is at hand. Have an end—The fulfilment of the divine prediction, the complement of the divine order, is coming to a completion.

V. 38. Here are two swords-Many of Galilee carried them when they travelled, to defend themselves against robbers and assassins, who much infested their roads. But did the apostles need to seek such defence? And he said; It is enough-I did not mean literally, that every one of you must have a sword.

Verse 38. Lord, behold, here are two swords. And he said unto them, It is enough.] These words cannot be well understood as being an answer to the supposed command of Christ, for every one who had no sword to go and sell his garment and buy one; for, in this case, they were not enough, or sufficient, as nine of the disciples must be without any instrument of defence; but they may be understood as pointing out the readiness and determination of Peter, and perhaps some others, to defend our Lord: Thou shalt not be treated as a transgressor; here are two swords, and we will fight for thee. In Luke 22:33, Peter had said, he was ready to go with Christ either to prison or death; which showed his strong resolution to stand by and defend his Master, even at the expense of his life. But, alas, he depended too much on himself!

It is enough. The meaning probably is, there is enough said on the subject; as immediately after this he entered into his agony.

I must here confess that the matter about the swords appear to me very obscure. I am afraid I do not understand it, and I know of none who does. Schoettgen and Lightfoot have said much on the subject; others have endeavoured to get rid of the difficulty by translating macairan a knife, which was necessary on long journeys for providing forage and fuel; as they were to depend wholly on their own industry, under God, for all the necessaries of life, while going through the nations of the earth, preaching the Gospel to Jews and Gentiles. I cannot say which sense the reader should prefer.

38. They said, Lord… two swords—At the mention of a sword some of the disciples, taking him literally, bring him forth double his demand, two swords! It is enough—To illustrate my metaphor, quite enough; and too much, if it is real bloodshed you contemplate. The words gently rebuke the apostles’ mistake. They had these swords evidently concealed from our Lord. They may have provided them for defence against assailants, as even the priests did in the passage (Luke 10:31) from Jericho to Jerusalem. But they may have been knives for slaying the Passover lamb. See note on Matthew 26:51.

V. 39. Matthew 26:30.

Verses 39-46. He went, as he was wont — As was his custom every night; to the mount of Olives — See on Matthew 26:30-32. And when he was at the place — When he had entered the garden of Gethsemane; he said, Pray that ye enter not into temptation — Having forewarned them of the lamentable effect which his sufferings would have upon them; that they would all stumble that very night, according to the prophecy of Zechariah, he exhorted them to pray that the temptation might not entirely prevail against them, and cause their faith to fail altogether. And he was withdrawn from them about a stone’s cast — Namely, not only from the other disciples, whom he had left at the entrance into the garden, but from Peter, James, and John, whom he had taken with him farther into it: kneeled down — Matthew, fell on his face; Mark, fell on the ground; and prayed, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup — The Greek rather means, “O that thou wouldst remove this cup!” ei being evidently a particle of wishing. Therefore, in Mark it is, He prayed, that if it were possible the hour might pass from him; saying, Abba, Father, all things are possible to thee; take away this cup from me. It seems, he first kneeled and prayed, as Luke here says; then, in the vehemence of his earnestness, he fell on his face, and spake the words recorded by Matthew and Mark. In the mean time, his prayer, though most fervent, was accompanied with due expressions of resignation; for he immediately added, (Matthew,) Nevertheless, not as (Mark, what) I will, but as (Mark, what) thou wilt; or, as Luke here has it, not my will, but thine be done. And there appeared an angel — Probably standing near him in a visible form; strengthening him — Lest his body should sink and die before the time; and perhaps suggesting such holy consolations as were most proper to animate his soul in such a struggle. It is probable, that during this time of suffering the divine nature had withdrawn its usual support. And being in an agony — Probably now conflicting with the powers of darkness; feeling the weight of the wrath of God, due to the sins of mankind, and at the same time surrounded with a mighty host of devils, who exercised all their force, subtlety, and malice to persecute, distract, and oppress his wounded spirit; he prayed more earnestly — Than before, even with stronger cries and tears; and his sweat — Cold as the weather was; was as it were great drops of blood — Which, by the vehement distress of his soul, were forced out of the pores of his body, in so great a quantity as afterward united in large, thick, grumous drops, and even fell to the ground. Thus Jesus suffered unspeakable sorrows in his soul, as long as the divine wisdom saw fit. At length he obtained relief, being heard in that which he feared, (Hebrews 5:7,) or, on account of his piety, or perfect submission to the will of his Father, as apo thv eulabeiav, may be translated.

§ 131. THE AGONY OF GETHSEMANE, 39-46.

See notes on Matthew 26:30, 36-46; Mark 14:26, 32-42; John 18:1.

39. Came out—Our Lord now changes the scene from the supper-table to the garden. As he was wont—We are to conceive our Lord as an habitual walker to the Mount of Olives from the toils of the day.

V. 40. The place-The garden of Gethsemane.

Verse 40. When he was at the place] Viz. Gethsemane. On this agony of our Lord see the notes on Matthew 26:36-46.

Verses 39-46. He went, as he was wont — As was his custom every night; to the mount of Olives — See on Matthew 26:30-32. And when he was at the place — When he had entered the garden of Gethsemane; he said, Pray that ye enter not into temptation — Having forewarned them of the lamentable effect which his sufferings would have upon them; that they would all stumble that very night, according to the prophecy of Zechariah, he exhorted them to pray that the temptation might not entirely prevail against them, and cause their faith to fail altogether. And he was withdrawn from them about a stone’s cast — Namely, not only from the other disciples, whom he had left at the entrance into the garden, but from Peter, James, and John, whom he had taken with him farther into it: kneeled down — Matthew, fell on his face; Mark, fell on the ground; and prayed, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup — The Greek rather means, “O that thou wouldst remove this cup!” ei being evidently a particle of wishing. Therefore, in Mark it is, He prayed, that if it were possible the hour might pass from him; saying, Abba, Father, all things are possible to thee; take away this cup from me. It seems, he first kneeled and prayed, as Luke here says; then, in the vehemence of his earnestness, he fell on his face, and spake the words recorded by Matthew and Mark. In the mean time, his prayer, though most fervent, was accompanied with due expressions of resignation; for he immediately added, (Matthew,) Nevertheless, not as (Mark, what) I will, but as (Mark, what) thou wilt; or, as Luke here has it, not my will, but thine be done. And there appeared an angel — Probably standing near him in a visible form; strengthening him — Lest his body should sink and die before the time; and perhaps suggesting such holy consolations as were most proper to animate his soul in such a struggle. It is probable, that during this time of suffering the divine nature had withdrawn its usual support. And being in an agony — Probably now conflicting with the powers of darkness; feeling the weight of the wrath of God, due to the sins of mankind, and at the same time surrounded with a mighty host of devils, who exercised all their force, subtlety, and malice to persecute, distract, and oppress his wounded spirit; he prayed more earnestly — Than before, even with stronger cries and tears; and his sweat — Cold as the weather was; was as it were great drops of blood — Which, by the vehement distress of his soul, were forced out of the pores of his body, in so great a quantity as afterward united in large, thick, grumous drops, and even fell to the ground. Thus Jesus suffered unspeakable sorrows in his soul, as long as the divine wisdom saw fit. At length he obtained relief, being heard in that which he feared, (Hebrews 5:7,) or, on account of his piety, or perfect submission to the will of his Father, as apo thv eulabeiav, may be translated.

§ 131. THE AGONY OF GETHSEMANE, 39-46.

See notes on Matthew 26:30, 36-46; Mark 14:26, 32-42; John 18:1.

39. Came out—Our Lord now changes the scene from the supper-table to the garden. As he was wont—We are to conceive our Lord as an habitual walker to the Mount of Olives from the toils of the day.

Verses 39-46. He went, as he was wont — As was his custom every night; to the mount of Olives — See on Matthew 26:30-32. And when he was at the place — When he had entered the garden of Gethsemane; he said, Pray that ye enter not into temptation — Having forewarned them of the lamentable effect which his sufferings would have upon them; that they would all stumble that very night, according to the prophecy of Zechariah, he exhorted them to pray that the temptation might not entirely prevail against them, and cause their faith to fail altogether. And he was withdrawn from them about a stone’s cast — Namely, not only from the other disciples, whom he had left at the entrance into the garden, but from Peter, James, and John, whom he had taken with him farther into it: kneeled down — Matthew, fell on his face; Mark, fell on the ground; and prayed, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup — The Greek rather means, “O that thou wouldst remove this cup!” ei being evidently a particle of wishing. Therefore, in Mark it is, He prayed, that if it were possible the hour might pass from him; saying, Abba, Father, all things are possible to thee; take away this cup from me. It seems, he first kneeled and prayed, as Luke here says; then, in the vehemence of his earnestness, he fell on his face, and spake the words recorded by Matthew and Mark. In the mean time, his prayer, though most fervent, was accompanied with due expressions of resignation; for he immediately added, (Matthew,) Nevertheless, not as (Mark, what) I will, but as (Mark, what) thou wilt; or, as Luke here has it, not my will, but thine be done. And there appeared an angel — Probably standing near him in a visible form; strengthening him — Lest his body should sink and die before the time; and perhaps suggesting such holy consolations as were most proper to animate his soul in such a struggle. It is probable, that during this time of suffering the divine nature had withdrawn its usual support. And being in an agony — Probably now conflicting with the powers of darkness; feeling the weight of the wrath of God, due to the sins of mankind, and at the same time surrounded with a mighty host of devils, who exercised all their force, subtlety, and malice to persecute, distract, and oppress his wounded spirit; he prayed more earnestly — Than before, even with stronger cries and tears; and his sweat — Cold as the weather was; was as it were great drops of blood — Which, by the vehement distress of his soul, were forced out of the pores of his body, in so great a quantity as afterward united in large, thick, grumous drops, and even fell to the ground. Thus Jesus suffered unspeakable sorrows in his soul, as long as the divine wisdom saw fit. At length he obtained relief, being heard in that which he feared, (Hebrews 5:7,) or, on account of his piety, or perfect submission to the will of his Father, as apo thv eulabeiav, may be translated.

41. Withdrawn from them—He first withdrew from the body of the disciples, attended by Peter, James, and John. He now withdraws from the three. About a stone’s cast—A customary measurement in the Greek and Roman writers.

Verses 39-46. He went, as he was wont — As was his custom every night; to the mount of Olives — See on Matthew 26:30-32. And when he was at the place — When he had entered the garden of Gethsemane; he said, Pray that ye enter not into temptation — Having forewarned them of the lamentable effect which his sufferings would have upon them; that they would all stumble that very night, according to the prophecy of Zechariah, he exhorted them to pray that the temptation might not entirely prevail against them, and cause their faith to fail altogether. And he was withdrawn from them about a stone’s cast — Namely, not only from the other disciples, whom he had left at the entrance into the garden, but from Peter, James, and John, whom he had taken with him farther into it: kneeled down — Matthew, fell on his face; Mark, fell on the ground; and prayed, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup — The Greek rather means, “O that thou wouldst remove this cup!” ei being evidently a particle of wishing. Therefore, in Mark it is, He prayed, that if it were possible the hour might pass from him; saying, Abba, Father, all things are possible to thee; take away this cup from me. It seems, he first kneeled and prayed, as Luke here says; then, in the vehemence of his earnestness, he fell on his face, and spake the words recorded by Matthew and Mark. In the mean time, his prayer, though most fervent, was accompanied with due expressions of resignation; for he immediately added, (Matthew,) Nevertheless, not as (Mark, what) I will, but as (Mark, what) thou wilt; or, as Luke here has it, not my will, but thine be done. And there appeared an angel — Probably standing near him in a visible form; strengthening him — Lest his body should sink and die before the time; and perhaps suggesting such holy consolations as were most proper to animate his soul in such a struggle. It is probable, that during this time of suffering the divine nature had withdrawn its usual support. And being in an agony — Probably now conflicting with the powers of darkness; feeling the weight of the wrath of God, due to the sins of mankind, and at the same time surrounded with a mighty host of devils, who exercised all their force, subtlety, and malice to persecute, distract, and oppress his wounded spirit; he prayed more earnestly — Than before, even with stronger cries and tears; and his sweat — Cold as the weather was; was as it were great drops of blood — Which, by the vehement distress of his soul, were forced out of the pores of his body, in so great a quantity as afterward united in large, thick, grumous drops, and even fell to the ground. Thus Jesus suffered unspeakable sorrows in his soul, as long as the divine wisdom saw fit. At length he obtained relief, being heard in that which he feared, (Hebrews 5:7,) or, on account of his piety, or perfect submission to the will of his Father, as apo thv eulabeiav, may be translated.

§ 131. THE AGONY OF GETHSEMANE, 39-46.

See notes on Matthew 26:30, 36-46; Mark 14:26, 32-42; John 18:1.

39. Came out—Our Lord now changes the scene from the supper-table to the garden. As he was wont—We are to conceive our Lord as an habitual walker to the Mount of Olives from the toils of the day.

V. 43. Strengthening him-Lest his body should sink and die before the time.

Verse 43. There appeared an angel-from heaven] It was as necessary that the fullest evidence should be given, not only of our Lord’s Divinity, but also of his humanity: his miracles sufficiently attested the former; his hunger, weariness, and agony in the garden, as well as his death and burial, were proofs of the latter. As man, he needs the assistance of an angel to support his body, worn down by fatigue and suffering. See Clarke at the end of “Luke 22:44”.

Verses 39-46. He went, as he was wont — As was his custom every night; to the mount of Olives — See on Matthew 26:30-32. And when he was at the place — When he had entered the garden of Gethsemane; he said, Pray that ye enter not into temptation — Having forewarned them of the lamentable effect which his sufferings would have upon them; that they would all stumble that very night, according to the prophecy of Zechariah, he exhorted them to pray that the temptation might not entirely prevail against them, and cause their faith to fail altogether. And he was withdrawn from them about a stone’s cast — Namely, not only from the other disciples, whom he had left at the entrance into the garden, but from Peter, James, and John, whom he had taken with him farther into it: kneeled down — Matthew, fell on his face; Mark, fell on the ground; and prayed, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup — The Greek rather means, “O that thou wouldst remove this cup!” ei being evidently a particle of wishing. Therefore, in Mark it is, He prayed, that if it were possible the hour might pass from him; saying, Abba, Father, all things are possible to thee; take away this cup from me. It seems, he first kneeled and prayed, as Luke here says; then, in the vehemence of his earnestness, he fell on his face, and spake the words recorded by Matthew and Mark. In the mean time, his prayer, though most fervent, was accompanied with due expressions of resignation; for he immediately added, (Matthew,) Nevertheless, not as (Mark, what) I will, but as (Mark, what) thou wilt; or, as Luke here has it, not my will, but thine be done. And there appeared an angel — Probably standing near him in a visible form; strengthening him — Lest his body should sink and die before the time; and perhaps suggesting such holy consolations as were most proper to animate his soul in such a struggle. It is probable, that during this time of suffering the divine nature had withdrawn its usual support. And being in an agony — Probably now conflicting with the powers of darkness; feeling the weight of the wrath of God, due to the sins of mankind, and at the same time surrounded with a mighty host of devils, who exercised all their force, subtlety, and malice to persecute, distract, and oppress his wounded spirit; he prayed more earnestly — Than before, even with stronger cries and tears; and his sweat — Cold as the weather was; was as it were great drops of blood — Which, by the vehement distress of his soul, were forced out of the pores of his body, in so great a quantity as afterward united in large, thick, grumous drops, and even fell to the ground. Thus Jesus suffered unspeakable sorrows in his soul, as long as the divine wisdom saw fit. At length he obtained relief, being heard in that which he feared, (Hebrews 5:7,) or, on account of his piety, or perfect submission to the will of his Father, as apo thv eulabeiav, may be translated.

43. An angel—The angel appeared to him. Strengthening him—So that, as appears in the following verse, he encountered a still greater agony, and prayed even a more earnest prayer, accompanied by the bloody sweat.

V. 44. And being in an agony-Probably just now grappling with the powers of darkness: feeling the weight of the wrath of God, and at the same time surrounded with a mighty host of devils, who exercised all their force and malice to persecute and distract his wounded spirit. He prayed more earnestly-Even with stronger cries and tears: and his sweat-As cold as the weather was,

was as it were great drops of blood-Which, by the vehement distress of his soul, were forced out of the pores, in so great a quantity as afterward united in large, thick, grumous drops, and even fell to the ground.

Verse 44. Prayed more earnestly] With greater emphasis and earnestness than usual, with strong crying and tears, Hebrews 5:7; the reason given for which is, that he was in an agony. Kypke well observes, Vox agwnia summum animi angorem et dolorem indicat; et idem est, quod adhmonein, Matthew 26:37; Mark 14:34. “The word agwnia (agony) points out the utmost anguish and grief of soul, and is of the same import with adhmonein in Matthew and Mark.” See Clarke’s note on “Matthew 26:37”.

Drops of blood] See Clarke’s note on “Matthew 26:38”. Some have thought that the meaning of the words is, that the sweat was so profuse that every drop was as large as a drop of blood, not that the sweat was blood itself: but this does not appear likely. There have been cases in which persons in a debilitated state of body, or through horror of soul, have had their sweat tinged with blood. Dr. Mead from Galen observes, Contingere interdum, poros ex multo aut fervido spiritu adeo dilatari, ut etiam exeat sanguis per eos, fiatque sudor sanguineus. “Cases sometimes happen in which, through mental pressure, the pores may be so dilated that the blood may issue from them; so that there may be a bloody sweat.” And Bishop PEARCE gives an instance from Thuanus (Deuteronomy Thou) of an Italian gentleman being so distressed with the fear of death that his body was covered with a bloody sweat. But it is fully evident that the fear of death could have no place in the mind of our blessed Lord. He was in the bloom of life, in perfect health, and had never suffered any thing from disease of any kind; this sweat was most assuredly produced by a preternatural cause. See at the end of the chapter. See Clarke “Luke 22:71”.

Verses 39-46. He went, as he was wont — As was his custom every night; to the mount of Olives — See on Matthew 26:30-32. And when he was at the place — When he had entered the garden of Gethsemane; he said, Pray that ye enter not into temptation — Having forewarned them of the lamentable effect which his sufferings would have upon them; that they would all stumble that very night, according to the prophecy of Zechariah, he exhorted them to pray that the temptation might not entirely prevail against them, and cause their faith to fail altogether. And he was withdrawn from them about a stone’s cast — Namely, not only from the other disciples, whom he had left at the entrance into the garden, but from Peter, James, and John, whom he had taken with him farther into it: kneeled down — Matthew, fell on his face; Mark, fell on the ground; and prayed, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup — The Greek rather means, “O that thou wouldst remove this cup!” ei being evidently a particle of wishing. Therefore, in Mark it is, He prayed, that if it were possible the hour might pass from him; saying, Abba, Father, all things are possible to thee; take away this cup from me. It seems, he first kneeled and prayed, as Luke here says; then, in the vehemence of his earnestness, he fell on his face, and spake the words recorded by Matthew and Mark. In the mean time, his prayer, though most fervent, was accompanied with due expressions of resignation; for he immediately added, (Matthew,) Nevertheless, not as (Mark, what) I will, but as (Mark, what) thou wilt; or, as Luke here has it, not my will, but thine be done. And there appeared an angel — Probably standing near him in a visible form; strengthening him — Lest his body should sink and die before the time; and perhaps suggesting such holy consolations as were most proper to animate his soul in such a struggle. It is probable, that during this time of suffering the divine nature had withdrawn its usual support. And being in an agony — Probably now conflicting with the powers of darkness; feeling the weight of the wrath of God, due to the sins of mankind, and at the same time surrounded with a mighty host of devils, who exercised all their force, subtlety, and malice to persecute, distract, and oppress his wounded spirit; he prayed more earnestly — Than before, even with stronger cries and tears; and his sweat — Cold as the weather was; was as it were great drops of blood — Which, by the vehement distress of his soul, were forced out of the pores of his body, in so great a quantity as afterward united in large, thick, grumous drops, and even fell to the ground. Thus Jesus suffered unspeakable sorrows in his soul, as long as the divine wisdom saw fit. At length he obtained relief, being heard in that which he feared, (Hebrews 5:7,) or, on account of his piety, or perfect submission to the will of his Father, as apo thv eulabeiav, may be translated.

Ver. 44. Being in an agony he prayed more earnestly. St. Mark says he began to be sorely amazed, and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood, falling down to the ground. Biblical critics quote Aristotle, a physician, and Diodorus Siculus, who both affirm that violent wrestling and exertions will produce these effects. And who can conceive the conflict of wrestling under the divine displeasure against a guilty world?

44. Sweat… great drops of blood—Instances of what has been called bloody sweat are on record numerous and authentic. Dr. Clarke on the passage quotes Galen through Mead as saying: “Cases sometimes happen in which, through mental pressure, the pores may be so dilated that the blood may issue from them; so that there may be a bloody sweat.” The Latin poet, Lucan, in his poem, the Pharsalia, vividly describes a case in which sudor rubet, the sweat is ruddy. Yet Luke affirms not that it was blood, but “as it were great drops of blood.”

§ 132. JESUS IS BETRAYED, 47-53.

See notes on Matthew 26:47-56; Mark 14:43-52; John 18:2-12.

Verses 45, 46. And when he rose up from prayer — After this dreadful conflict; and was come to his disciples — Namely, the third time; notwithstanding the repeated admonitions he had given them, he again found them sleeping — And that, as the evangelist says, for sorrow — The sensations of grief which they felt at the sight of their Master’s distress so overpowering them, that they sunk into sleep; a circumstance which shows how much they were affected with his sufferings. And said unto them, Why sleep ye — Why do you still persist to sleep at such a season as this? I call upon you yet once more, to rise and pray, lest ye enter into and fall by the approaching most dangerous temptation. See the various circumstances attending this dreadful scene of our Lord’s sufferings in the garden more fully elucidated in the notes on Matthew 26:36-46; and Mark 14:32, &c.

§ 131. THE AGONY OF GETHSEMANE, 39-46.

See notes on Matthew 26:30, 36-46; Mark 14:26, 32-42; John 18:1.

39. Came out—Our Lord now changes the scene from the supper-table to the garden. As he was wont—We are to conceive our Lord as an habitual walker to the Mount of Olives from the toils of the day.

Verses 45, 46. And when he rose up from prayer — After this dreadful conflict; and was come to his disciples — Namely, the third time; notwithstanding the repeated admonitions he had given them, he again found them sleeping — And that, as the evangelist says, for sorrow — The sensations of grief which they felt at the sight of their Master’s distress so overpowering them, that they sunk into sleep; a circumstance which shows how much they were affected with his sufferings. And said unto them, Why sleep ye — Why do you still persist to sleep at such a season as this? I call upon you yet once more, to rise and pray, lest ye enter into and fall by the approaching most dangerous temptation. See the various circumstances attending this dreadful scene of our Lord’s sufferings in the garden more fully elucidated in the notes on Matthew 26:36-46; and Mark 14:32, &c.

§ 131. THE AGONY OF GETHSEMANE, 39-46.

See notes on Matthew 26:30, 36-46; Mark 14:26, 32-42; John 18:1.

39. Came out—Our Lord now changes the scene from the supper-table to the garden. As he was wont—We are to conceive our Lord as an habitual walker to the Mount of Olives from the toils of the day.

Verses 47, 48. And while he yet spake, behold, a multitude had entered the garden, consisting of persons of very different stations and offices in life; and Judas went before them — To lead them to the place, and show them the man they wanted, by kissing him. See on Matthew 26:47-56; Mark 14:43-49. Betrayest thou the Son of man with a kiss? — Dost thou make my condescending kindness the occasion of thy base treachery, and use that as the signal of it, which, among men, is the usual token either of love or homage? And dost thou thus betray him who is thy Lord and Master, and whom thou canst not but know to be the Messiah, entitled in the Scriptures, the Son of man? And dost thou think that he can be imposed upon by this poor artifice? or that God, who has promised him so glorious and triumphant a kingdom, will not punish such baseness and cruelty to him? “There is great reason to believe,” says Dr. Doddridge, “that our Lord uses this phrase of the Son of man to Judas on this occasion, (as he had done the same evening at supper, twice in a breath,) in the sense here given. And it adds a spirit to these words that has not often been observed, which the attentive reader will discern to be attended with much greater strength and beauty, than if our Lord had only said, Dost thou betray me with a kiss?”

V. 48. Betrayest thou the Son of man-He whom thou knowest to be the Son of man, the Christ?

Verse 48. Betrayest thou the Son of man with a kiss?] Dost thou attempt to kiss me as a friend, while thou art delivering me up into the hands of my enemies? We need not wonder at all this, as Satan himself had entered into the heart of this traitor, see Luke 22:3; consequently we can expect nothing from him but what is fell, deceitful, and cruel.

Verses 47, 48. And while he yet spake, behold, a multitude had entered the garden, consisting of persons of very different stations and offices in life; and Judas went before them — To lead them to the place, and show them the man they wanted, by kissing him. See on Matthew 26:47-56; Mark 14:43-49. Betrayest thou the Son of man with a kiss? — Dost thou make my condescending kindness the occasion of thy base treachery, and use that as the signal of it, which, among men, is the usual token either of love or homage? And dost thou thus betray him who is thy Lord and Master, and whom thou canst not but know to be the Messiah, entitled in the Scriptures, the Son of man? And dost thou think that he can be imposed upon by this poor artifice? or that God, who has promised him so glorious and triumphant a kingdom, will not punish such baseness and cruelty to him? “There is great reason to believe,” says Dr. Doddridge, “that our Lord uses this phrase of the Son of man to Judas on this occasion, (as he had done the same evening at supper, twice in a breath,) in the sense here given. And it adds a spirit to these words that has not often been observed, which the attentive reader will discern to be attended with much greater strength and beauty, than if our Lord had only said, Dost thou betray me with a kiss?”

V. 49. Seeing what would follow-That they were just going to seize him. Matthew 26:51; Mark 14:47.

Verses 49-51. When they which were about him saw what would follow — That the band was just going to seize Jesus, or had already seized him, and were about to lead him away; they said, Lord, shall we smite with the sword? — Thou didst allow us to have two swords, shall we now make use of them? Surely never can there be a greater occasion for doing it: and we doubt not but, few as we are, thou canst render us victorious over this armed multitude. They did not wait for an answer from Jesus, but one of them — Namely, Peter, immediately smote the servant of the high-priest — One who, it is probable, was the forwardest, and seemed peculiarly officious in seizing Christ. Peter struck full at his head, intending to cleave him down, but the stroke glanced a little on one side, so that he only cut off his right ear. Jesus said, Suffer ye thus far — Let me go to the wounded man, and have my hands at liberty, while I do one more act of mercy. And he touched his ear, and healed him — Putting the ear on again, which was cut off, or creating a new one in the place of it. It may not be improper to observe, that two other interpretations are given of the clause, Suffer ye thus far. “All antiquity,” says Dr. Campbell, “seems agreed in understanding our Lord’s expression as a check to his disciples, by intimating that they were not to proceed further in the way of resistance, as it was not to such methods of defence that he chose to recur: and what is recorded by the other evangelists, as likewise said on the occasion, strongly confirms this explanation.” Dr. Whitby thinks that Christ spake thus to the soldiers, desiring them thus far to suffer the rash opposition of his disciples, and not to proceed to violence against them, on account of the assault made, and injury done by one of them, which he would immediately repair; for it follows, and he healed him. “And this,” adds the doctor, “he said and did partly to show, that he, who had such power to heal, and (John 18:6) to throw down his enemies, was taken willingly, and not for want of power to preserve himself: and partly to preserve his apostles from their assaults.” It must be acknowledged that all these interpretations are plausible; but the first, which is adopted by Elsner, Doddridge, Macknight, Wesley, and many others, seems as probable as either of the others, and certainly exhibits the mercy and benevolence of our Lord in the most amiable and striking point of view. And one would have thought, that such a generous piece of kindness to his enemies would have so overcome them, that they would have proceeded no further against him. But, alas! their hearts were hardened! How illustriously did our Lord now exemplify his own rule of doing good to them that hate us, as he afterward did that which enjoins us to pray for them that despitefully use us and persecute us.

Verse 50. Cut off his right ear.] See Clarke’s note on “Matthew 26:51”.

Verses 49-51. When they which were about him saw what would follow — That the band was just going to seize Jesus, or had already seized him, and were about to lead him away; they said, Lord, shall we smite with the sword? — Thou didst allow us to have two swords, shall we now make use of them? Surely never can there be a greater occasion for doing it: and we doubt not but, few as we are, thou canst render us victorious over this armed multitude. They did not wait for an answer from Jesus, but one of them — Namely, Peter, immediately smote the servant of the high-priest — One who, it is probable, was the forwardest, and seemed peculiarly officious in seizing Christ. Peter struck full at his head, intending to cleave him down, but the stroke glanced a little on one side, so that he only cut off his right ear. Jesus said, Suffer ye thus far — Let me go to the wounded man, and have my hands at liberty, while I do one more act of mercy. And he touched his ear, and healed him — Putting the ear on again, which was cut off, or creating a new one in the place of it. It may not be improper to observe, that two other interpretations are given of the clause, Suffer ye thus far. “All antiquity,” says Dr. Campbell, “seems agreed in understanding our Lord’s expression as a check to his disciples, by intimating that they were not to proceed further in the way of resistance, as it was not to such methods of defence that he chose to recur: and what is recorded by the other evangelists, as likewise said on the occasion, strongly confirms this explanation.” Dr. Whitby thinks that Christ spake thus to the soldiers, desiring them thus far to suffer the rash opposition of his disciples, and not to proceed to violence against them, on account of the assault made, and injury done by one of them, which he would immediately repair; for it follows, and he healed him. “And this,” adds the doctor, “he said and did partly to show, that he, who had such power to heal, and (John 18:6) to throw down his enemies, was taken willingly, and not for want of power to preserve himself: and partly to preserve his apostles from their assaults.” It must be acknowledged that all these interpretations are plausible; but the first, which is adopted by Elsner, Doddridge, Macknight, Wesley, and many others, seems as probable as either of the others, and certainly exhibits the mercy and benevolence of our Lord in the most amiable and striking point of view. And one would have thought, that such a generous piece of kindness to his enemies would have so overcome them, that they would have proceeded no further against him. But, alas! their hearts were hardened! How illustriously did our Lord now exemplify his own rule of doing good to them that hate us, as he afterward did that which enjoins us to pray for them that despitefully use us and persecute us.

V. 51. Suffer me at least to have my hands at liberty thus far, while I do one more act of mercy.

Verse 51. Suffer ye thus far.] Or, Suffer me to go thus far. As they had now a firm hold of Christ, Matthew 26:50, he wished them to permit him to go as far as Malchus, whose ear was cut off, that he might heal it. See the objections brought against this interpretation answered by Kypke; and see the examples he produces. However, the words may be understood as an address to his disciples: Let them proceed; make no resistance; for in this way only are the Scriptures to be fulfilled.

Verses 49-51. When they which were about him saw what would follow — That the band was just going to seize Jesus, or had already seized him, and were about to lead him away; they said, Lord, shall we smite with the sword? — Thou didst allow us to have two swords, shall we now make use of them? Surely never can there be a greater occasion for doing it: and we doubt not but, few as we are, thou canst render us victorious over this armed multitude. They did not wait for an answer from Jesus, but one of them — Namely, Peter, immediately smote the servant of the high-priest — One who, it is probable, was the forwardest, and seemed peculiarly officious in seizing Christ. Peter struck full at his head, intending to cleave him down, but the stroke glanced a little on one side, so that he only cut off his right ear. Jesus said, Suffer ye thus far — Let me go to the wounded man, and have my hands at liberty, while I do one more act of mercy. And he touched his ear, and healed him — Putting the ear on again, which was cut off, or creating a new one in the place of it. It may not be improper to observe, that two other interpretations are given of the clause, Suffer ye thus far. “All antiquity,” says Dr. Campbell, “seems agreed in understanding our Lord’s expression as a check to his disciples, by intimating that they were not to proceed further in the way of resistance, as it was not to such methods of defence that he chose to recur: and what is recorded by the other evangelists, as likewise said on the occasion, strongly confirms this explanation.” Dr. Whitby thinks that Christ spake thus to the soldiers, desiring them thus far to suffer the rash opposition of his disciples, and not to proceed to violence against them, on account of the assault made, and injury done by one of them, which he would immediately repair; for it follows, and he healed him. “And this,” adds the doctor, “he said and did partly to show, that he, who had such power to heal, and (John 18:6) to throw down his enemies, was taken willingly, and not for want of power to preserve himself: and partly to preserve his apostles from their assaults.” It must be acknowledged that all these interpretations are plausible; but the first, which is adopted by Elsner, Doddridge, Macknight, Wesley, and many others, seems as probable as either of the others, and certainly exhibits the mercy and benevolence of our Lord in the most amiable and striking point of view. And one would have thought, that such a generous piece of kindness to his enemies would have so overcome them, that they would have proceeded no further against him. But, alas! their hearts were hardened! How illustriously did our Lord now exemplify his own rule of doing good to them that hate us, as he afterward did that which enjoins us to pray for them that despitefully use us and persecute us.

51. Suffer ye thus far—Addressed to the soldiers in regard to healing Malchus. Being fettered, he requests them to permit him to do that much.

V. 52. Jesus said to the chief priests, and captains, and the elders who were come-And all these came of their own accord: the soldiers and servants were sent.

Verses 52, 53. Jesus said unto the chief priests, captains, &c. — The soldiers and servants were sent to apprehend Jesus, but these chief priests, &c. came of their own accord; and, it seems, kept at a distance during the scuffle, but drew near when they understood that Jesus was taken. Be ye come out as against a thief? — See on Matthew 26:55, 56. This is your hour — Before which you could not take me; and the power of darkness — The time when Satan has power.

V. 53. This is your hour-Before which ye could not take me: and the power of darkness-The time when Satan has power.

Verse 53. I was daily with you in the temple] Alluding to the four preceding days, during the whole of which he taught in the temple, see Luke 21:37, and Matthew 21:17.

This is your hour, and the power of darkness.] That is, the time in which you are permitted to unrein your malice; which ye could not do before, because God did not permit you; and so perfectly are ye under his control that neither you nor the prince of darkness can proceed a hair’s breadth against me but through this permission: see at the end of the chapter. What a comfortable thought is it to the followers of Christ, that neither men nor demons can act against them but by the permission of their heavenly Father, and that he will not suffer any of those who trust in him to be tried above what they are able to bear, and will make the trial issue in their greater salvation, and in his glory!

Verses 52, 53. Jesus said unto the chief priests, captains, &c. — The soldiers and servants were sent to apprehend Jesus, but these chief priests, &c. came of their own accord; and, it seems, kept at a distance during the scuffle, but drew near when they understood that Jesus was taken. Be ye come out as against a thief? — See on Matthew 26:55, 56. This is your hour — Before which you could not take me; and the power of darkness — The time when Satan has power.

53. But this is your hour, and the power of darkness—This is your long-sought hour to destroy me; this is the Satanic power of darkness which co-operates with you. Is there a contrast between daylight and darkness? My teaching accords with the light; your deeds with the darkness.

§ 133. PETER’S DENIAL OF CHRIST, 54-62.

See notes on Matthew 26:58-75; Mark 14:53-72; John 18:13-27.

§ 134. JESUS BEFORE CAIAPHAS AND THE COUNCIL PRONOUNCED WORTHY OF DEATH AND INSULTED, 63-71.

See notes on Matthew 26:57, 59-68; Mark 14:53, 55-65; John 18:19-23.

In the present chapter of Luke verses 63-65 must come after 66-71, as a comparison with the other evangelists will show.

V. 54. Matthew 26:57; Mark 14:53; John 18:12.

Verses 54-62. Then took they him, and brought him into the high-priest’s house — See on Matthew 26:57; and Mark 14:53, 51. When they had kindled a fire, Peter sat down among them — See the story of Peter’s three-fold denial of Christ elucidated at large in the notes on Matthew 26:69-75; and Mark 14:66-72. Another saw him, and said — Observe here, in order to reconcile the four evangelists, that divers persons concurred in charging Peter with belonging to Christ. 1st, The maid that let him in, afterward seeing him at the fire, first put the question to him, and then positively affirmed that he was with Christ. 2d, Another maid accused him to the standers by, and gave occasion to the man here mentioned to renew the charge against him, which caused the second denial. 3d, Others of the company took notice of his being a Galilean, and were seconded by the kinsman of Malchus, who affirmed he had seen him in the garden. And this drew on the third denial. And about an hour after — So he did not recollect himself in all that time.

Ver. 54. Peter followed afar off. See on Matthew 26:75. John 21.

Verses 54-62. Then took they him, and brought him into the high-priest’s house — See on Matthew 26:57; and Mark 14:53, 51. When they had kindled a fire, Peter sat down among them — See the story of Peter’s three-fold denial of Christ elucidated at large in the notes on Matthew 26:69-75; and Mark 14:66-72. Another saw him, and said — Observe here, in order to reconcile the four evangelists, that divers persons concurred in charging Peter with belonging to Christ. 1st, The maid that let him in, afterward seeing him at the fire, first put the question to him, and then positively affirmed that he was with Christ. 2d, Another maid accused him to the standers by, and gave occasion to the man here mentioned to renew the charge against him, which caused the second denial. 3d, Others of the company took notice of his being a Galilean, and were seconded by the kinsman of Malchus, who affirmed he had seen him in the garden. And this drew on the third denial. And about an hour after — So he did not recollect himself in all that time.

Verse 56. A certain maid beheld him] Or, Attentively beholding him, atenisasa. And this she did by the help of the light of the fire at which Peter sat.

Verses 54-62. Then took they him, and brought him into the high-priest’s house — See on Matthew 26:57; and Mark 14:53, 51. When they had kindled a fire, Peter sat down among them — See the story of Peter’s three-fold denial of Christ elucidated at large in the notes on Matthew 26:69-75; and Mark 14:66-72. Another saw him, and said — Observe here, in order to reconcile the four evangelists, that divers persons concurred in charging Peter with belonging to Christ. 1st, The maid that let him in, afterward seeing him at the fire, first put the question to him, and then positively affirmed that he was with Christ. 2d, Another maid accused him to the standers by, and gave occasion to the man here mentioned to renew the charge against him, which caused the second denial. 3d, Others of the company took notice of his being a Galilean, and were seconded by the kinsman of Malchus, who affirmed he had seen him in the garden. And this drew on the third denial. And about an hour after — So he did not recollect himself in all that time.

Verse 57. And he denied him] See the notes on Matthew 26:58, 69, &c.

Verses 54-62. Then took they him, and brought him into the high-priest’s house — See on Matthew 26:57; and Mark 14:53, 51. When they had kindled a fire, Peter sat down among them — See the story of Peter’s three-fold denial of Christ elucidated at large in the notes on Matthew 26:69-75; and Mark 14:66-72. Another saw him, and said — Observe here, in order to reconcile the four evangelists, that divers persons concurred in charging Peter with belonging to Christ. 1st, The maid that let him in, afterward seeing him at the fire, first put the question to him, and then positively affirmed that he was with Christ. 2d, Another maid accused him to the standers by, and gave occasion to the man here mentioned to renew the charge against him, which caused the second denial. 3d, Others of the company took notice of his being a Galilean, and were seconded by the kinsman of Malchus, who affirmed he had seen him in the garden. And this drew on the third denial. And about an hour after — So he did not recollect himself in all that time.

V. 58. Another man saw him and said-Observe here, in order to reconcile the four evangelists, that divers persons concurred in charging Peter with belonging to Christ.

1. The maid that led him in, afterward seeing him at the fire, first put the question to him, and then positively affirmed, that he was with Christ.

2. Another maid accused him to the standers by, and gave occasion to the man here mentioned, to renew the charge against him, which caused the second denial.

3. Others of the company took notice of his being a Galilean, and were seconded by the kinsman of Malchus, who affirmed he had seen him in the garden. And this drew on the third denial.

Verses 54-62. Then took they him, and brought him into the high-priest’s house — See on Matthew 26:57; and Mark 14:53, 51. When they had kindled a fire, Peter sat down among them — See the story of Peter’s three-fold denial of Christ elucidated at large in the notes on Matthew 26:69-75; and Mark 14:66-72. Another saw him, and said — Observe here, in order to reconcile the four evangelists, that divers persons concurred in charging Peter with belonging to Christ. 1st, The maid that let him in, afterward seeing him at the fire, first put the question to him, and then positively affirmed that he was with Christ. 2d, Another maid accused him to the standers by, and gave occasion to the man here mentioned to renew the charge against him, which caused the second denial. 3d, Others of the company took notice of his being a Galilean, and were seconded by the kinsman of Malchus, who affirmed he had seen him in the garden. And this drew on the third denial. And about an hour after — So he did not recollect himself in all that time.

V. 59. And about one hour after-So he did not recollect himself in all that time.

Verses 54-62. Then took they him, and brought him into the high-priest’s house — See on Matthew 26:57; and Mark 14:53, 51. When they had kindled a fire, Peter sat down among them — See the story of Peter’s three-fold denial of Christ elucidated at large in the notes on Matthew 26:69-75; and Mark 14:66-72. Another saw him, and said — Observe here, in order to reconcile the four evangelists, that divers persons concurred in charging Peter with belonging to Christ. 1st, The maid that let him in, afterward seeing him at the fire, first put the question to him, and then positively affirmed that he was with Christ. 2d, Another maid accused him to the standers by, and gave occasion to the man here mentioned to renew the charge against him, which caused the second denial. 3d, Others of the company took notice of his being a Galilean, and were seconded by the kinsman of Malchus, who affirmed he had seen him in the garden. And this drew on the third denial. And about an hour after — So he did not recollect himself in all that time.

Verses 54-62. Then took they him, and brought him into the high-priest’s house — See on Matthew 26:57; and Mark 14:53, 51. When they had kindled a fire, Peter sat down among them — See the story of Peter’s three-fold denial of Christ elucidated at large in the notes on Matthew 26:69-75; and Mark 14:66-72. Another saw him, and said — Observe here, in order to reconcile the four evangelists, that divers persons concurred in charging Peter with belonging to Christ. 1st, The maid that let him in, afterward seeing him at the fire, first put the question to him, and then positively affirmed that he was with Christ. 2d, Another maid accused him to the standers by, and gave occasion to the man here mentioned to renew the charge against him, which caused the second denial. 3d, Others of the company took notice of his being a Galilean, and were seconded by the kinsman of Malchus, who affirmed he had seen him in the garden. And this drew on the third denial. And about an hour after — So he did not recollect himself in all that time.

Verse 61. The Lord turned, and looked upon Peter.] See Clarke’s note on “Matthew 26:75”, where this delicate reproof is particularly noted.

Verses 54-62. Then took they him, and brought him into the high-priest’s house — See on Matthew 26:57; and Mark 14:53, 51. When they had kindled a fire, Peter sat down among them — See the story of Peter’s three-fold denial of Christ elucidated at large in the notes on Matthew 26:69-75; and Mark 14:66-72. Another saw him, and said — Observe here, in order to reconcile the four evangelists, that divers persons concurred in charging Peter with belonging to Christ. 1st, The maid that let him in, afterward seeing him at the fire, first put the question to him, and then positively affirmed that he was with Christ. 2d, Another maid accused him to the standers by, and gave occasion to the man here mentioned to renew the charge against him, which caused the second denial. 3d, Others of the company took notice of his being a Galilean, and were seconded by the kinsman of Malchus, who affirmed he had seen him in the garden. And this drew on the third denial. And about an hour after — So he did not recollect himself in all that time.

Verse 62. And Peter went out] The word Peter is omitted by BDKLM, and many other good MSS., with some of the ancient versions. Griesbach leaves it out of the text.

Verses 54-62. Then took they him, and brought him into the high-priest’s house — See on Matthew 26:57; and Mark 14:53, 51. When they had kindled a fire, Peter sat down among them — See the story of Peter’s three-fold denial of Christ elucidated at large in the notes on Matthew 26:69-75; and Mark 14:66-72. Another saw him, and said — Observe here, in order to reconcile the four evangelists, that divers persons concurred in charging Peter with belonging to Christ. 1st, The maid that let him in, afterward seeing him at the fire, first put the question to him, and then positively affirmed that he was with Christ. 2d, Another maid accused him to the standers by, and gave occasion to the man here mentioned to renew the charge against him, which caused the second denial. 3d, Others of the company took notice of his being a Galilean, and were seconded by the kinsman of Malchus, who affirmed he had seen him in the garden. And this drew on the third denial. And about an hour after — So he did not recollect himself in all that time.

V. 63. Matthew 26:67; Mark 14:65.

Verse 63. Mocked him, and smote him.] This and the following verses are placed by Matthew and Mark before the relation of Peter’s denial. For their explanation, see on Matthew 26:67, 68.

Verses 63-65. And the men that held Jesus mocked him — What has just been related concerning Peter, passed while the priests examined Jesus, of which examination, before Luke gives an account, he mentions the following remarkable circumstance, namely, that the men who held Jesus mocked him and smote him. And when they had blindfolded him, struck him on the face — These circumstances are placed by Matthew and Mark after the council’s condemning him. Perhaps he was abused in the same manner both before and after his condemnation. Certainly “his judges and their retinue were abundantly capable of being thus unjust and barbarous toward him. Nevertheless, what Luke has said here, does not necessarily oblige us to suppose this. He might conclude his account of Peter’s denials with relating what followed upon our Lord’s being condemned, because it happened immediately after the last denial; and to show what a load of indignity was laid at once on the Son of God; namely, that while the most zealous of all his disciples was denying him with oaths and imprecations, the servants and others were insulting him in the most barbarous manner.” — Macknight. Saying, Prophesy, who is it that smote thee? — “This usage of Christ,” says Dr. Hammond, “refers to that sport so ordinary among children, called muinda, in which it is the manner, first to blindfold, then to strike, (verse 63,) then to ask who gave the blow, and not to let the person go till he had named the right man who had struck him. It was used on this occasion to reproach our blessed Lord, and to expose him to ridicule.” Many other things spake they blasphemously against him — The expression is remarkable. They charged him with blasphemy, because he said he was the Son of God: but the evangelist fixes that charge on them, because he was really so.

V. 64. And having blindfolded him, they struck him on the face-This is placed by St. Matthew and Mark, after the council's condemning him. Probably he was abused in the same manner, both before and after his condemnation.

Verses 63-65. And the men that held Jesus mocked him — What has just been related concerning Peter, passed while the priests examined Jesus, of which examination, before Luke gives an account, he mentions the following remarkable circumstance, namely, that the men who held Jesus mocked him and smote him. And when they had blindfolded him, struck him on the face — These circumstances are placed by Matthew and Mark after the council’s condemning him. Perhaps he was abused in the same manner both before and after his condemnation. Certainly “his judges and their retinue were abundantly capable of being thus unjust and barbarous toward him. Nevertheless, what Luke has said here, does not necessarily oblige us to suppose this. He might conclude his account of Peter’s denials with relating what followed upon our Lord’s being condemned, because it happened immediately after the last denial; and to show what a load of indignity was laid at once on the Son of God; namely, that while the most zealous of all his disciples was denying him with oaths and imprecations, the servants and others were insulting him in the most barbarous manner.” — Macknight. Saying, Prophesy, who is it that smote thee? — “This usage of Christ,” says Dr. Hammond, “refers to that sport so ordinary among children, called muinda, in which it is the manner, first to blindfold, then to strike, (verse 63,) then to ask who gave the blow, and not to let the person go till he had named the right man who had struck him. It was used on this occasion to reproach our blessed Lord, and to expose him to ridicule.” Many other things spake they blasphemously against him — The expression is remarkable. They charged him with blasphemy, because he said he was the Son of God: but the evangelist fixes that charge on them, because he was really so.

V. 65. Many other things blasphemously spake they against him-The expression is remarkable. They charged him with blasphemy, because he said he was the Son of God: but the evangelist fixes that charge on them, because he really was so.

Verses 63-65. And the men that held Jesus mocked him — What has just been related concerning Peter, passed while the priests examined Jesus, of which examination, before Luke gives an account, he mentions the following remarkable circumstance, namely, that the men who held Jesus mocked him and smote him. And when they had blindfolded him, struck him on the face — These circumstances are placed by Matthew and Mark after the council’s condemning him. Perhaps he was abused in the same manner both before and after his condemnation. Certainly “his judges and their retinue were abundantly capable of being thus unjust and barbarous toward him. Nevertheless, what Luke has said here, does not necessarily oblige us to suppose this. He might conclude his account of Peter’s denials with relating what followed upon our Lord’s being condemned, because it happened immediately after the last denial; and to show what a load of indignity was laid at once on the Son of God; namely, that while the most zealous of all his disciples was denying him with oaths and imprecations, the servants and others were insulting him in the most barbarous manner.” — Macknight. Saying, Prophesy, who is it that smote thee? — “This usage of Christ,” says Dr. Hammond, “refers to that sport so ordinary among children, called muinda, in which it is the manner, first to blindfold, then to strike, (verse 63,) then to ask who gave the blow, and not to let the person go till he had named the right man who had struck him. It was used on this occasion to reproach our blessed Lord, and to expose him to ridicule.” Many other things spake they blasphemously against him — The expression is remarkable. They charged him with blasphemy, because he said he was the Son of God: but the evangelist fixes that charge on them, because he was really so.

V. 66. Matthew 26:63; Mark 14:61.

Verses 66-71. And as soon as it was day, the elders of the people, and the chief-priests, &c., came together — When the band of soldiers arrived at the high-priest’s with Jesus, they found many of the chief-priests, and the scribes, and the elders assembled there. (Mark 14:53.) Some persons of distinction, however, may have been absent, whose coming the rest would wait for. Wherefore, although the soldiers brought Jesus to the high-priest’s a while after midnight, his trial did not begin till about three in the morning: the intermediate time being spent in procuring witnesses, in sending for the absent members, in gathering the clerks and officers of the court, and in fitting up an apartment for the trial. For, that Jesus was tried by the council, not in the temple, as many suppose, but in the high-priest’s palace, is evident from John 18:28, where we are expressly told, that they led Jesus from Caiaphas’s house to the pretorium. Saying, Art thou the Christ? tell us — Dost thou give up the pretensions thou hast formerly made, or dost thou maintain them? If thou art indeed the Messiah, tell us plainly, and it will bring matters to a short issue. It seems, these wretches hoped to gain a great advantage against Jesus either way; if he confessed it, they would condemn him on that confession; and if he denied it, they would expose him on that denial, as afraid to maintain the pretensions he had made. And he said, If I tell you — That I am the Christ, and give you the most convincing proofs of it, you are resolved that you will not believe. And if I ask you — What you have to object against the proofs I produce; you will not answer me — Here he seems to refer to their silence, when he put a question to them which would have led them to his own authority, Luke 20:5-7. Nor let me go — If I be not the Christ, you ought to answer the arguments by which I prove that I am; if I be, you ought to let me go; but you will do neither: you will only overbear me with renewed violence. Hereafter shall the Son of man sit, &c. — The day will come, when ye shall see the Son of man, who now stands in this despised and lowly form at your tribunal, exalted to all the dignity and glory which that high title imports; sitting on the right hand of the power of God — And coming with irresistible strength to take vengeance on the proudest of his enemies. See on Matthew 26:59-64; and Mark 14:53-65. Then said they all, Art thou then the Son of God? — A number of them cried out together, feigning great astonishment at the blasphemy, as they were pleased to call it, of his answer, and desiring him to repeat it, lest they might have mistaken him, asked, Art thou then the Son of God? — Both these, the Son of God, and the Son of man, were known titles of the Messiah, the one taken from his divine, and the other from his human, nature. And he said unto them, Ye say that I am — This, according to the Jewish manner of speaking, was a plain and strong affirmation of the thing expressed. When the high-priest heard our Lord’s second reply, he solemnly rent his clothes, crying out, that he had spoken blasphemy; and, appealing to the council, he said, What need we any further witness? (Mark 16:64.) And they said, What need we, &c. — The council replied, As you have justly observed, what need have we of witnesses now, seeing we ourselves have heard in what manner he hath blasphemed? And being asked what punishment he deserved, they answered, that he deserved death. Matthew 26:26, 66.

Verses 66-71. And as soon as it was day, the elders of the people, and the chief-priests, &c., came together — When the band of soldiers arrived at the high-priest’s with Jesus, they found many of the chief-priests, and the scribes, and the elders assembled there. (Mark 14:53.) Some persons of distinction, however, may have been absent, whose coming the rest would wait for. Wherefore, although the soldiers brought Jesus to the high-priest’s a while after midnight, his trial did not begin till about three in the morning: the intermediate time being spent in procuring witnesses, in sending for the absent members, in gathering the clerks and officers of the court, and in fitting up an apartment for the trial. For, that Jesus was tried by the council, not in the temple, as many suppose, but in the high-priest’s palace, is evident from John 18:28, where we are expressly told, that they led Jesus from Caiaphas’s house to the pretorium. Saying, Art thou the Christ? tell us — Dost thou give up the pretensions thou hast formerly made, or dost thou maintain them? If thou art indeed the Messiah, tell us plainly, and it will bring matters to a short issue. It seems, these wretches hoped to gain a great advantage against Jesus either way; if he confessed it, they would condemn him on that confession; and if he denied it, they would expose him on that denial, as afraid to maintain the pretensions he had made. And he said, If I tell you — That I am the Christ, and give you the most convincing proofs of it, you are resolved that you will not believe. And if I ask you — What you have to object against the proofs I produce; you will not answer me — Here he seems to refer to their silence, when he put a question to them which would have led them to his own authority, Luke 20:5-7. Nor let me go — If I be not the Christ, you ought to answer the arguments by which I prove that I am; if I be, you ought to let me go; but you will do neither: you will only overbear me with renewed violence. Hereafter shall the Son of man sit, &c. — The day will come, when ye shall see the Son of man, who now stands in this despised and lowly form at your tribunal, exalted to all the dignity and glory which that high title imports; sitting on the right hand of the power of God — And coming with irresistible strength to take vengeance on the proudest of his enemies. See on Matthew 26:59-64; and Mark 14:53-65. Then said they all, Art thou then the Son of God? — A number of them cried out together, feigning great astonishment at the blasphemy, as they were pleased to call it, of his answer, and desiring him to repeat it, lest they might have mistaken him, asked, Art thou then the Son of God? — Both these, the Son of God, and the Son of man, were known titles of the Messiah, the one taken from his divine, and the other from his human, nature. And he said unto them, Ye say that I am — This, according to the Jewish manner of speaking, was a plain and strong affirmation of the thing expressed. When the high-priest heard our Lord’s second reply, he solemnly rent his clothes, crying out, that he had spoken blasphemy; and, appealing to the council, he said, What need we any further witness? (Mark 16:64.) And they said, What need we, &c. — The council replied, As you have justly observed, what need have we of witnesses now, seeing we ourselves have heard in what manner he hath blasphemed? And being asked what punishment he deserved, they answered, that he deserved death. Matthew 26:26, 66.

Verse 68. And if I also ask you] Concerning the Christ, in case ye cannot give me such an answer as may prove I am not the Christ, ye will not let me go; for I know ye are determined to put me to death.

Verses 66-71. And as soon as it was day, the elders of the people, and the chief-priests, &c., came together — When the band of soldiers arrived at the high-priest’s with Jesus, they found many of the chief-priests, and the scribes, and the elders assembled there. (Mark 14:53.) Some persons of distinction, however, may have been absent, whose coming the rest would wait for. Wherefore, although the soldiers brought Jesus to the high-priest’s a while after midnight, his trial did not begin till about three in the morning: the intermediate time being spent in procuring witnesses, in sending for the absent members, in gathering the clerks and officers of the court, and in fitting up an apartment for the trial. For, that Jesus was tried by the council, not in the temple, as many suppose, but in the high-priest’s palace, is evident from John 18:28, where we are expressly told, that they led Jesus from Caiaphas’s house to the pretorium. Saying, Art thou the Christ? tell us — Dost thou give up the pretensions thou hast formerly made, or dost thou maintain them? If thou art indeed the Messiah, tell us plainly, and it will bring matters to a short issue. It seems, these wretches hoped to gain a great advantage against Jesus either way; if he confessed it, they would condemn him on that confession; and if he denied it, they would expose him on that denial, as afraid to maintain the pretensions he had made. And he said, If I tell you — That I am the Christ, and give you the most convincing proofs of it, you are resolved that you will not believe. And if I ask you — What you have to object against the proofs I produce; you will not answer me — Here he seems to refer to their silence, when he put a question to them which would have led them to his own authority, Luke 20:5-7. Nor let me go — If I be not the Christ, you ought to answer the arguments by which I prove that I am; if I be, you ought to let me go; but you will do neither: you will only overbear me with renewed violence. Hereafter shall the Son of man sit, &c. — The day will come, when ye shall see the Son of man, who now stands in this despised and lowly form at your tribunal, exalted to all the dignity and glory which that high title imports; sitting on the right hand of the power of God — And coming with irresistible strength to take vengeance on the proudest of his enemies. See on Matthew 26:59-64; and Mark 14:53-65. Then said they all, Art thou then the Son of God? — A number of them cried out together, feigning great astonishment at the blasphemy, as they were pleased to call it, of his answer, and desiring him to repeat it, lest they might have mistaken him, asked, Art thou then the Son of God? — Both these, the Son of God, and the Son of man, were known titles of the Messiah, the one taken from his divine, and the other from his human, nature. And he said unto them, Ye say that I am — This, according to the Jewish manner of speaking, was a plain and strong affirmation of the thing expressed. When the high-priest heard our Lord’s second reply, he solemnly rent his clothes, crying out, that he had spoken blasphemy; and, appealing to the council, he said, What need we any further witness? (Mark 16:64.) And they said, What need we, &c. — The council replied, As you have justly observed, what need have we of witnesses now, seeing we ourselves have heard in what manner he hath blasphemed? And being asked what punishment he deserved, they answered, that he deserved death. Matthew 26:26, 66.

Verse 69. Hereafter] From this very time, apo tou nun. The kingdom of God is now going to be set up. See the note on Matthew 16:27, 28.

Verses 66-71. And as soon as it was day, the elders of the people, and the chief-priests, &c., came together — When the band of soldiers arrived at the high-priest’s with Jesus, they found many of the chief-priests, and the scribes, and the elders assembled there. (Mark 14:53.) Some persons of distinction, however, may have been absent, whose coming the rest would wait for. Wherefore, although the soldiers brought Jesus to the high-priest’s a while after midnight, his trial did not begin till about three in the morning: the intermediate time being spent in procuring witnesses, in sending for the absent members, in gathering the clerks and officers of the court, and in fitting up an apartment for the trial. For, that Jesus was tried by the council, not in the temple, as many suppose, but in the high-priest’s palace, is evident from John 18:28, where we are expressly told, that they led Jesus from Caiaphas’s house to the pretorium. Saying, Art thou the Christ? tell us — Dost thou give up the pretensions thou hast formerly made, or dost thou maintain them? If thou art indeed the Messiah, tell us plainly, and it will bring matters to a short issue. It seems, these wretches hoped to gain a great advantage against Jesus either way; if he confessed it, they would condemn him on that confession; and if he denied it, they would expose him on that denial, as afraid to maintain the pretensions he had made. And he said, If I tell you — That I am the Christ, and give you the most convincing proofs of it, you are resolved that you will not believe. And if I ask you — What you have to object against the proofs I produce; you will not answer me — Here he seems to refer to their silence, when he put a question to them which would have led them to his own authority, Luke 20:5-7. Nor let me go — If I be not the Christ, you ought to answer the arguments by which I prove that I am; if I be, you ought to let me go; but you will do neither: you will only overbear me with renewed violence. Hereafter shall the Son of man sit, &c. — The day will come, when ye shall see the Son of man, who now stands in this despised and lowly form at your tribunal, exalted to all the dignity and glory which that high title imports; sitting on the right hand of the power of God — And coming with irresistible strength to take vengeance on the proudest of his enemies. See on Matthew 26:59-64; and Mark 14:53-65. Then said they all, Art thou then the Son of God? — A number of them cried out together, feigning great astonishment at the blasphemy, as they were pleased to call it, of his answer, and desiring him to repeat it, lest they might have mistaken him, asked, Art thou then the Son of God? — Both these, the Son of God, and the Son of man, were known titles of the Messiah, the one taken from his divine, and the other from his human, nature. And he said unto them, Ye say that I am — This, according to the Jewish manner of speaking, was a plain and strong affirmation of the thing expressed. When the high-priest heard our Lord’s second reply, he solemnly rent his clothes, crying out, that he had spoken blasphemy; and, appealing to the council, he said, What need we any further witness? (Mark 16:64.) And they said, What need we, &c. — The council replied, As you have justly observed, what need have we of witnesses now, seeing we ourselves have heard in what manner he hath blasphemed? And being asked what punishment he deserved, they answered, that he deserved death. Matthew 26:26, 66.

V. 70. They all said, Art thou then the Son of God?-Both these, the Son of God, and the Son of man, were known titles of the Messiah; the one taken from his Divine, and the other from his human nature.

Verse 70. Art thou then the Son of God?] They all insisted on an answer to this question, and the high priest particularly put it to him, Matthew 26:63.

Verses 66-71. And as soon as it was day, the elders of the people, and the chief-priests, &c., came together — When the band of soldiers arrived at the high-priest’s with Jesus, they found many of the chief-priests, and the scribes, and the elders assembled there. (Mark 14:53.) Some persons of distinction, however, may have been absent, whose coming the rest would wait for. Wherefore, although the soldiers brought Jesus to the high-priest’s a while after midnight, his trial did not begin till about three in the morning: the intermediate time being spent in procuring witnesses, in sending for the absent members, in gathering the clerks and officers of the court, and in fitting up an apartment for the trial. For, that Jesus was tried by the council, not in the temple, as many suppose, but in the high-priest’s palace, is evident from John 18:28, where we are expressly told, that they led Jesus from Caiaphas’s house to the pretorium. Saying, Art thou the Christ? tell us — Dost thou give up the pretensions thou hast formerly made, or dost thou maintain them? If thou art indeed the Messiah, tell us plainly, and it will bring matters to a short issue. It seems, these wretches hoped to gain a great advantage against Jesus either way; if he confessed it, they would condemn him on that confession; and if he denied it, they would expose him on that denial, as afraid to maintain the pretensions he had made. And he said, If I tell you — That I am the Christ, and give you the most convincing proofs of it, you are resolved that you will not believe. And if I ask you — What you have to object against the proofs I produce; you will not answer me — Here he seems to refer to their silence, when he put a question to them which would have led them to his own authority, Luke 20:5-7. Nor let me go — If I be not the Christ, you ought to answer the arguments by which I prove that I am; if I be, you ought to let me go; but you will do neither: you will only overbear me with renewed violence. Hereafter shall the Son of man sit, &c. — The day will come, when ye shall see the Son of man, who now stands in this despised and lowly form at your tribunal, exalted to all the dignity and glory which that high title imports; sitting on the right hand of the power of God — And coming with irresistible strength to take vengeance on the proudest of his enemies. See on Matthew 26:59-64; and Mark 14:53-65. Then said they all, Art thou then the Son of God? — A number of them cried out together, feigning great astonishment at the blasphemy, as they were pleased to call it, of his answer, and desiring him to repeat it, lest they might have mistaken him, asked, Art thou then the Son of God? — Both these, the Son of God, and the Son of man, were known titles of the Messiah, the one taken from his divine, and the other from his human, nature. And he said unto them, Ye say that I am — This, according to the Jewish manner of speaking, was a plain and strong affirmation of the thing expressed. When the high-priest heard our Lord’s second reply, he solemnly rent his clothes, crying out, that he had spoken blasphemy; and, appealing to the council, he said, What need we any further witness? (Mark 16:64.) And they said, What need we, &c. — The council replied, As you have justly observed, what need have we of witnesses now, seeing we ourselves have heard in what manner he hath blasphemed? And being asked what punishment he deserved, they answered, that he deserved death. Matthew 26:26, 66.

Verse 71. We ourselves have heard] We have heard him profess himself the Son of God; he is therefore guilty of blasphemy, and, as an impious pretender to a Divine mission, we must proceed against and condemn him to death. See Clarke’s note on “Matthew 26:66”. Thus they proceeded as far as they could; he must now be brought before Pilate, as the Jews had no power to put him to death. His trial before Pilate is related in the subsequent chapter.

ON our Lord’s agony in the garden, related in the 43d and 44th verses, {Luke 22:43, 44} much has been written, but to little purpose. The cause of this agony seems not to have been well understood; and there have been many wild conjectures concerning it. Some think it was occasioned by “the Divine wrath pressing in upon him; for, as he was bearing the sin of the world, God looked on and treated him as if he were a sinner.” There is something very shocking in this supposition; and yet it is truly astonishing how general it is. The ministry of the angel, in this case, is a sufficient refutation of this opinion; for what sort of strength could an angel give Christ against God’s indignation? Angelic strength could not enable him to bear either the sin of the world or God’s wrath. If an angel could have succoured him in this, an angel might have made the whole atonement. Indeed, the ministry of the angel, who must have been sent from God, and sent in love too, is a full proof that God’s wrath was not poured out on our blessed Redeemer at this time. Dr. Lightfoot conjectures that his conflict in the garden was with a devil, who appeared to him in a bodily shape, most horrible; and that it was through this apparition that he began to be sore amazed, and very heavy, Mark 14:33; for, as Satan assaulted the first Adam in a garden in a bodily shape, it is not unreasonable to conclude that in the same way he assaulted the second Adam in a garden. St. Luke tells us, Luke 4:13, that when the devil had finished all his temptations, he departed from him for a season: this season in the garden, probably, was the season, or fit opportunity, for him to return-the prince of this world came and found nothing in him, John 14:30. But, though there was nothing in the immaculate Jesus on which Satan could work, yet he might, as the doctor supposes, assume some horrible shape, in order to appal his mind, and shake his firmness; and the evangelist seems to intimate that he had desired to be permitted to try or sift the disciples in this way, see Luke 22:31; and it is probable that it is to some personal, horrid appearance, that the apostle alludes when he speaks of the messenger of Satan that buffeted him, 2 Corinthians 12:7. The angel, therefore, from heaven, may be supposed to come against this angel from hell; and, as the one appeared to terrify, the other appeared to strengthen him. It was not necessary to exert the Divine power to crush this devil, and therefore an angel from heaven is sent to counteract his influence. This is the sum of Dr. Lightfoot’s reasonings upon this very difficult subject.

Others suppose that, while our Lord was praying intensely in the garden, the extreme fervour of his application to God in the behalf of the poor deluded Jews, and in behalf of the world, was too much for his human nature to support; that he, in consequence, fell into a swoon, in which he had a VISION of an angel coming from heaven to strengthen him. Let these sentiments stand on their respective merits.

What renders this circumstance more difficult is, that there is no mention of it in any of the other evangelists: and it is worthy of remark that, among many of the ancients, the authenticity of these two verses, the 43d and 44th, {Luke 22:43, 44} has been doubted, and in consequence they are omitted in several MSS., and in some versions and fathers. The Codex Alexandrinus and the Codex Vaticanus, the two oldest MSS. in the world, omit both verses; in some other very ancient MSS. they stand with an asterisk before them, as a mark of dubiousness; and they are both wanting in the Coptic Fragments published by Dr. Ford. They are however extant in such a vast number of MSS., versions, and fathers, as to leave no doubt with most critics of their authenticity. After all that has been said, or perhaps can be said on this subject, there will remain mysteries which only the bright light of the eternal world can sufficiently illustrate. That Christ was now suffering, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, and that he was bearing in his body the punishment due to their sins, I have no doubt: and that the agony of his mind, in these vicarious sufferings, caused the effusion from his body, of the bloody sweat, may be easily credited without supposing him to be at all under the displeasure of his heavenly Father; for, as God can see nothing but as it is, he could not see him as a sinner who was purity itself. In every act, Jesus was that beloved Son in whom the Father was ever well pleased.

As to the angel strengthening him, probably no more is meant by it than a friendly sympathizing of one of those heavenly beings with their Lord in distress: this circumstance is the most difficult in the whole relation; but, understood thus, the difficulty is removed; for what strength could the highest angel in heaven afford to our blessed Lord in his atoning acts? Surely, none. The bare supposition is insupportable. But, if we allow that the angel came to sympathize with him during his passions the whole account will appear plain and consistent.

ST. LUKE

Verses 66-71. And as soon as it was day, the elders of the people, and the chief-priests, &c., came together — When the band of soldiers arrived at the high-priest’s with Jesus, they found many of the chief-priests, and the scribes, and the elders assembled there. (Mark 14:53.) Some persons of distinction, however, may have been absent, whose coming the rest would wait for. Wherefore, although the soldiers brought Jesus to the high-priest’s a while after midnight, his trial did not begin till about three in the morning: the intermediate time being spent in procuring witnesses, in sending for the absent members, in gathering the clerks and officers of the court, and in fitting up an apartment for the trial. For, that Jesus was tried by the council, not in the temple, as many suppose, but in the high-priest’s palace, is evident from John 18:28, where we are expressly told, that they led Jesus from Caiaphas’s house to the pretorium. Saying, Art thou the Christ? tell us — Dost thou give up the pretensions thou hast formerly made, or dost thou maintain them? If thou art indeed the Messiah, tell us plainly, and it will bring matters to a short issue. It seems, these wretches hoped to gain a great advantage against Jesus either way; if he confessed it, they would condemn him on that confession; and if he denied it, they would expose him on that denial, as afraid to maintain the pretensions he had made. And he said, If I tell you — That I am the Christ, and give you the most convincing proofs of it, you are resolved that you will not believe. And if I ask you — What you have to object against the proofs I produce; you will not answer me — Here he seems to refer to their silence, when he put a question to them which would have led them to his own authority, Luke 20:5-7. Nor let me go — If I be not the Christ, you ought to answer the arguments by which I prove that I am; if I be, you ought to let me go; but you will do neither: you will only overbear me with renewed violence. Hereafter shall the Son of man sit, &c. — The day will come, when ye shall see the Son of man, who now stands in this despised and lowly form at your tribunal, exalted to all the dignity and glory which that high title imports; sitting on the right hand of the power of God — And coming with irresistible strength to take vengeance on the proudest of his enemies. See on Matthew 26:59-64; and Mark 14:53-65. Then said they all, Art thou then the Son of God? — A number of them cried out together, feigning great astonishment at the blasphemy, as they were pleased to call it, of his answer, and desiring him to repeat it, lest they might have mistaken him, asked, Art thou then the Son of God? — Both these, the Son of God, and the Son of man, were known titles of the Messiah, the one taken from his divine, and the other from his human, nature. And he said unto them, Ye say that I am — This, according to the Jewish manner of speaking, was a plain and strong affirmation of the thing expressed. When the high-priest heard our Lord’s second reply, he solemnly rent his clothes, crying out, that he had spoken blasphemy; and, appealing to the council, he said, What need we any further witness? (Mark 16:64.) And they said, What need we, &c. — The council replied, As you have justly observed, what need have we of witnesses now, seeing we ourselves have heard in what manner he hath blasphemed? And being asked what punishment he deserved, they answered, that he deserved death. Matthew 26:26, 66.