Page images
PDF
EPUB

that nature, as is the case with those whom we see from casual or stated intercourse. A passage in the Book of Tobit, quoted by Heinsius, explains this well. The angel is made to say, that he appeared to them in the shape of a common man, and that they had not taken him for an angel :-" All these days I did appear unto you; but I did neither eat nor drink, but ye did see a vision." Tobit xii. 19.

66

Being assembled together."] Every one, who understands Greek, knows that the original signifies" to assemble," "to be together," and to eat with me," and that there has been a question, which should be preferred.

66

"With."] Jesus did actually eat with his disciples, and the Syriac, the Arabic translation, edited by Espenius, and the vulgate confirm it; but, as on further reading, the immediate subject seems to apply to the ascension, and not to the appearance on the day of resurrection, the above construction seems unappropriate. Others conceive, that Jesus only conversed with his disciples, and in this they are borne out by the old Latin translation, "and when he had conversation with them ;" and by the Arabic, printed in the Polyglott. I do not reject this by any means, and offer my ideas upon it thus; that

Jesus was again together with his disciples, and (for the sake of connexion with what follows) for the last time, previous to his ascension, that he then instructs his disciples agreeably to what we afterwards read, and that they then interrogate him, respecting the kingdom of Israel. Another illustration, however, occurs to me, which I do not, however, contend for, but leave to the discretion of my readers. The Greek word may be rendered "to assemble," to command that others should "assemble and remain together." Supposing this sense to be admitted, then it might be

1. That he commanded them to remain together, and not to quit Jerusalem until they had received the Holy Ghost.

2. As Luke must have known of the journey to Galilee when he wrote the Acts of the Apostles, he commanded them to return from Galilee to Jerusalem, and to assemble on a given day, and in some particular place.

Lightfoot, who understood this passage to apply to the meeting in Galilee, has been sufficiently refuted by Whitby. When Jesus.commanded his disciples not to depart from Jerusalem, it is evident that they were then at Jerusalem.

"Should not depart from Jerusalem,”] I have already remarked, that this injunction is not at all at variance with the appearance in Galilee. If we say to any one, you shall not quit such a town, (as, for instance, you are not to leave the university before you shall have received an answer to an application, or before you shall have received a specific summons,) this is not a positive confinement within the precincts of a town, or a prohibition to be literally understood not to move from it, but merely an order generally that you are not to leave it; in fact, that you are not to change your usual residence. But, this illustration appears to me unnecessary, for I cannot understand it in any other light, than as recording the conversation which Jesus had with the disciples, the day of the ascension.

5. John introduced his proselytes to the new religion, which he preached by the command of God, solely by baptism with water. But you shall now be introduced to a higher baptism, by the most copious effusion of the gifts of the Holy Spirit. Baptism was, also amongst the Jews, a confession of having adopted a new religion.

6. "When they, therefore, were come to

gether."] This "therefore" contributes to make the whole more intelligible; especially when taken in connexion with what precedes, namely, that according to my illustration of it, he had commanded that they should come together.

"Wilt thou, at this time, restore again the kingdom to Israel."] The meaning of the words "restore again the kingdom to the people" is sufficiently obvious, to restore their ancient freedom and independence to a people who had, in former times, been independent, but had now lost their liberty, and were now become the subjects of others." The disciples expect the Messiah will do this; and, in fact, they were justified by the prophecies of Daniel, ii. 44, 45. vii. 13, 14, 27., in expecting a splendid reign for Israel. They are anxious to know when the time is drawing near; and what will be the nature of their agency in the erection of this new kingdom?" I cannot refrain from being surprised, that some commentators, and even Whitby, have found here such difficulties, namely, that the Israelites never had the kingdom, and that, consequently, it could not be restored to them they wish, therefore, to translate the passage, unconnected with common usage, "wilt

:

thou give the kingdom to Israel?" But had not the Israelites an independent, and a brilliant kingdom under David and Solomon ? And again, after the return from the Babylonish captivity, were they not independent under John Hyrcanus, his son Alexander, and his successors? What can be the object of these commentators? They contemplate an universal monarchy, and this, they say, the Jews never had; this is true, but the original word in Greek does not convey the idea of universal monarchy. Why should they contemplate that which the disciples have not once mentioned? These last certainly had not in view a spiritual kingdom, which should be assigned to Christ and not to the people of Israel, nor could they contemplate the millenium mentioned in the Apocalypse.

7. When I read the answer of Christ, I can only construe it thus: The people of Israel may expect hereafter liberty, independence, and national power, but the disciples are not to be embarassed with these notions; they are to do their duty, they are to be witnesses, when they shall have received the Holy Ghost, of what they have seen and heard, and propagate the Christian religion amongst Jews and heathens.

« PreviousContinue »