Jesus, to put him to death. In examining the witnesses, they acted like interested and enraged persecutors, rather than impartial judges. For they formed their questions after such a manner, as, if possible, to draw from them expressions which they might pervert into suspicions of guilt, whereupon they might condemn Jesus. 60. But found none, Yea, though many false witnesses came, yet found they none: Notwithstanding they were at the utmost pains to procure such a proof as in the eye of the law would justify the sentence they were resolved, at all hazards, to pass upon Jesus, they exerted themselves to no purpose. Be- cause, though they suborned many witnesses, these, in giving their testimony, contradicted one another; a circumstance which the most illiterate person in the court could not but be sensible invalidated their evidence. Mark xiv. 56. For many bare false witness against him, but their witness agreed not together. Matt. xxvi. At the last came two false witnesses, 61. And said, this fellow said, I am able to destroy the temple of God, (Mark, this temple that is made with hands) and to build it in three days (Mark, and within three days I will build another made without hands.) Mark xiv. 59. But neither so did their witness agree together. As they gave this testimony of their own accord, so it was most false. For Jesus never said he would destroy and build the temple of Jerusalem, as they affirmed. At the first passover indeed, after he had banished the traders out of the temple, the Jews required him to shew by what authority he took upon him to make that reformation; and io answer he referred them to the miracle of his resurrection; "Destroy (said he) this temple," pointing probably to his body," and I will raise it up in three days." The witnesses, it seems either through ignorance or malice, perverted his answer into an affirmation that he was able to destroy and build the temple in three days. And the judges reckoned it blasphemy, because it was an effect that could be accomplished by nothing less than Divine power. Wherefore these men are justly branded through the world with the name of false witnesses, and their testimony was deservedly disregarded by our Lord, especially as they had expressed great ill-will to him in giving it, contrary to all the rules of equity and goodness. This fellow, said they, contemptuously, &c. When the highpriest found that Jesus took little notice of the things which the witnesses said against him, he fell into a passion, supposing that he intended to put an affront upon the council; for he arose from his seat, which judges seldom do, unless when in some perturbation, and spake to him, desiring him to give the reason of his conduct. Matt. xxvi. 62. And the high-priest arose, (Mark, stood up in the midst) and said unto him, Answerest thou nothing? what is it which these witness against thee? 63. But Jesus held his peace, Mark xiv. 61. And answered nothing. Upon this

some

some of the council spake to him, Luke xxii. 67. Saying, Art thou the Christ? tell us. And he said unto them, If I tell you, you will not believe. 68. And if I also ask you, i. e. propose the proofs of my mission, and require you to give your opinion of them, ye will not answer me, nor let me go. The high-priest, therefore, to cut the trial short and ensnare Jesus, obliged him upon oath to tell, whether or no he was the Christ. Matt. xxvi. 63. And the high-priest answered and said unto him, I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us, Whether thou be the Christ the Son of God? (Mark, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?) The craft of the question lay in this, that if Jesus answered it in the affirmative, they were ready to condemn him as a blasphemer; but if in the negative, they proposed to punish him as an impostor, who, by accepting the honours and titles of the Messiah from the people, had deceived them. Mark xxiv. 62. And Jesus said, I am. Being put upon oath, or, according to Jewish customs, being adjured by the magistrate, he could no longer decline answering. See Lev. v. 1. He therefore confessed the charge, and added, Matt. xxvi. 64. Nevertheless, (≈aw, moreover, see Blackwall's Sac. Class. vol. ii. p. 132.) I say unta you, Hereafter ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, (Luke, of the power of God) and coming in the clouds of heaven; Ye shall see the sign from heaven, which ye have so often demanded in confirmation of my mission. See on Matt. xxiv. 30. § 123. Luke xxii. 70. 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 pleas. ed to call it, of his answer, and desiring him to repeat it, lest they might have mistaken him. 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: Mark xiv. 63. Then the high-priest

Mark 61. The Blessed.] This is a very sublime and emphatical man-. ner of expressing the happiness of God. It conveys such an idea of the divine blessedness, that, comparatively speaking, there is none happy but

he.

Matt. 64. Hereafter.] Ax' agri. Heinsius would have these words joined together, so as to make awag, the same with anugrioμivas, verc, plane

Mark 63. Then the high-priest rent his clothes.] Rending of clothes was an expression sometimes of deep grief, sometimes of holy zeal. The precepts, Lev. x. 6. xxi. 10. forbidding the high-priest to rend his clothes, relates only to the pontifical garments, and to private mourning, that is, mourning on account of the calamities befalling himself or friends. Griefs of this kind the chief minister of religion was not to make public by any outward sign whatever. But it was neither unlawful nor unusual for him

to

rent his clothes, and saith, (Matt. He hath spoken blasphemy) What need we any further witnesses? 64. Ye have heard the blasphemy. (Matt. behold now ye have heard his blasphemy.) The council replied, As you have justly observed, what need have we of witness now, seeing we ourselves have heard in what manner he has blasphemed? Luke xxii. 71. And they said, What need we any further witness? for we ourselves have heard of his own mouth. And being asked what punishment he deserved, they answered that he deserved death. Matt. xxvi. 66. What think ye? They answered and said, He is guilty of death. Mark xiv. 64. And they all condemned him to be guilty of death: They condemned him unanimously, excepting Nicodemus, and Joseph of Arimathea, and a few more, who being his disciples (John xii. 42.) would, if they were present, remonstrate no doubt against the iniquity of this sentence, Matt. xxvi. 67. Then did they spit in his face, (Mark, and some began to spit on him, and to cover his face, and to buffet him) and buffeted him (xorapie is to strike avith the fist) and others smote him with the palms of their hands (eae, from eaxis, baculus, is properly to strike with a staff or stick; but Matthew uses it to signify smiting with the palms of the hands, chap. v. 39.) 68. Saying, Prophesy unto us, thou Christ who is he that smote thee? Mark xiv. 65. And the servants did strike him with the palms of their hands. Because Matthew says that they who condemned Jesus spit in his face and buffeted him, and Mark mentions the indignities in particular which the servants put upon him, it appears that he was smitten, blindfolded, and buffeted even by some of the council, who, to ridicule him for having pretended to be the great prophet foretold by Moses, bade him exercise his prophetical gift in guessing who it was that struck him: Prophesy unto us, thou Christ, who is he that smote thee? It was, I think, hardly possible for those miscreants to invent any thing more expressive of the contempt in which they held our Lord's pretensions to be the Messiah.

Thus was the Judge of the world placed at the bar of his own creatures, falsely accused by the witnesses, unjustly condemned by his judges, and barbarously insulted by all. Yet because it was agreeable to the end of his coming, he patiently submitted, though he could with a frown have made his judges, his accusers, and those who had him in custody, all to drop down dead in a moment, or shrivel into nothing .

to rend his ordinary garments on account of public calamities, or instances of gross wickedness, as a testimony of his grief for the one, and abhorrence of the other. See 1 Maccab. xi. 71. That the high-priest was clothed in ordinary apparel on this occasion, appears from Exod. xxix. 29, 30. where the pontifical garments are ordered to descend from father to son; and therefore were to be worn only at their consecration, and when they ministered.

Luke tells us, xxii. 66. that Jesus was placed before the council about

break

break of day, as eyevero nuga. If the passover this year fell late in April,, the sun must at that season have risen to the inhabitants of Jerusalem about twenty-three minutes after five, and the day have dawned about fifteen minutes after three. Wherefore, since Luke fixes the appearing of Jesus before the council to the dawning, his trial must have begun about three in the morning. This is confirmed by the account which Matthew gives of the hour when Jesus was led away to the governor, xxvii. 1. After hav ing condemned Jesus, the priests consulted among themselves how they might get him put to death. The result of their deliberation was, that he should be loaded with chains as a notorious malefactor, and in that condi tion carried before the governor, in order to his passing sentence against him. This happened when the morning was come, or when it was light. The history given of Peter's denials agrees likewise to these suppositions. For the first denial happened as he followed his Master into the high-priest's palace. probably a while before the priests came into the hall, being qurs. tioned by the damsel who kept the door, John xviii. 17. Luke says the second denial happened a little while after the first, xxii. 58.; and that between the second and third there passed the space of an hour, perhaps some minutes less; so that the whole was over in little more than an hour. But the third denial is connected with the conclusion of our Lord's trial, John xviii. 27, 28. Wherefore, from his arrival at the palace to his departure, there passed hardly two hours of time. Or we may suppose that he was in the palace much longer; for the words a little after, by which Mark connects the second denial with the third, may be interpreted by Luke's space of an hour; and almost as much time may be allowed to have passed between the first and second; at least the evangelists have mentioned nothing that is inconsistent with these suppositions. They have indeed fixed the time of Christ's appearing before the council and the governor, but have said nothing of the time of his arrival at the high-priest's palace. We may therefore believe that he came a little after midnight; that more than an hour was spent in preparing for the trial; that the judges assembled in the hall half an hour after two; that they spent some time in de liberating what measures they were to follow in the trial; that when all matters were prepared, Jesus was brought in about three; that he continued before the council but a little while, perhaps not above an hour, the trial being cut short by his own declaration; that they carried him away to the governor as soon as it was fully light, perhaps about four, the time which Matthew seems to have fixed. This indeed was much earlier than Pilate was wont to hear causes; but as there was the appearance of a tumult, he thought proper to get up and see what the matter was. When the governor understood that Jesus was a Galilean, he sent him to Herod, who happened then to be in Jerusalem, and perhaps was lodged near the prætorium. Herod soon sent him back without finding him guilty, which confirmed the governor in the opinion he had conceived of his innocence. Wherefore he tried several stratagems to save his life, but to no purpose. At last he brought him out to the people, when it was (John xix. 14.) aga wσe sern, about six o'clock in the morning, perhaps half an hour after. It is true, that three hours and a balf, the time allotted for our Lord's trials, before the council, the governor, and Herod, may seem small, considering the number and nature of the things which happened in the course of those trials. Yet as that time is stated and divided above, it might be sufficient, especially if we add this consideration, that the extreme earnestness of the rulers to get him crucified before the holy convocation came on, would make them hurry every thing with the utmost impetuosity. The reason was, had they suffered this opportunity to pass, they might not soon have obtained another; the governor, by whose sentence alone death could be inflicted, usually leaving Jerusalem immediately after the passover, to go to Cesarea, the place of his ordinary residence. See the beginning of 138. See also the note one Mark xv. 25. § 145.

Judas

§ CXXXVIII. Jesus is brought before the governor.

hangs himself. Matt. xxvii. 1,-10. Mark xv. 1. Luke xxiii. 1. John xviii. 28.

THE priests and elders having condemned Jesus for the pretended crime of blasphemy, consulted together again, and resolved to carry him before the governor, loaded with chains, that he likewise might give sentence against him. They could not otherwise accomplish their purpose; the power of life and death being now taken out of their hands. Mark xv. 1. And straightway in the morning the chief priests held a consultation with the elders (Matt. of the people) and scribes, and the whole council, (Matt. against Jesus to put him to death) and bound Jesus, and carried him away, and delivered him to Pilate (Matt. Pontius Pilate the governor.) John xviii. 28. Then led they Jesus from Caiaphas unto the hall of judgment, to garraior, το πραιτωρίου, * the prætorium, the governor's palace. From the history of the Acts it appears, that the Roman governors of Judea resided commonly at Cesarea, and that there was only an inferior officer in Jerusalem, with a single legion to keep the peace of the city. At the great festivals, however, they came up to prevent or suppress tumults, and to administer justice; for the governors of provinces frequently vi sited the principal towns under their jurisdiction on this latter account. Accordingly it is insinuated, John xviii. 39. that Pilate was wont to give judgment in Jerusalem at the passovers: "Ye have a custom that I should release unto you one at the passover." Being come, therefore, as usual, a while before the feast, Pilate heard of the stir that was among the rulers, and was informed of the character of the person on whose account it was made, Matt. xxvii. 18. Mark xv. 10. It seems Nicodemus, or Joseph of Arimatheat, or some other friend, had told him of the affair; VOL. II.

3.U

for

Properly speaking, the prætorium was that part of the palace where the soldiers kept guard, Mark xv. 16.; but in common language it was applied to the palace in general.

↑ Joseph of Arimathea seems to have been personally acquainted with Pilate; for after Jesus expired, he went to him and begged leave to bury his body. We can have no doubt of their being acquainted, if Joseph was one of the council who assisted Pilate in managing the affairs of his province, and particularly in judging causes. All governors of provinces had a council of this kind. See Lardn. Cred. book I. chap. ii. § 16. Accordingly we find it mentioned, Acts xxv. 12. by the name of cupcov. It is objected, indeed, to Joseph's being a member of Pilate's council, that it was composed of Romans only. Yet even on this supposition he might be a member of it, since he might enjoy the privileges of a citizen as well as the apostle Paul. What other reason can be assigned for his being called Brλturns, Luke xxiii. 50. and surxnuw, Beλeutns, Mark xv. 43. a name not commonly given to the members of the sanhedrim, whose proper title was agxovtes. Farther, Luke tells us, xxiii. 51. that Joseph did not consent to the counsel, Brλn, and deed of them: he did not agree to the advice which the governor's council gave, when they desired him to gratify the Jews,