Page images
PDF
EPUB

conceive it was only a fainting fit, and not actual death. I am aware this is but a trifle, but the minutiæ, into which learned men descend, force me into it. There is, however, a difficulty which, I find, generally overlooked. How could Pilate, who, according to John xix. 31, 37, had ordered the bones of the crucified persons to be broken, preparatory to giving them the fatal blow, be astonished that Jesus was dead, doubt the fact, and call upon the Centurion to report the real case to him? The doubt would certainly be inexplicable if we read the evangelists, as we read the minute transactions of a diary, and if we concluded from John xix. 38, writing" after this," that Joseph had obtained access to Pilate, subsequent to the order being given for the breaking of the bones. But it is not thus that we read histories, compiled by others, and indeed no historian would venture such an accuracy of detail. It would be more in character, with astronomical precision. In a general view, the case would appear to stand thus; Jesus dies between three and four in the afternoon; Joseph immediately goes to Pilate, and requests the dead body; Pilate doubts the fact of his being dead, and orders the Centurion to be called. The Jews soon afterwards appear

and beg that the crucified persons may be killed, and their bodies taken down before sunset. Pilate orders this, and before the body of Jesus is actually taken down, the soldiers come and execute these orders. Joseph of Arimathea, and the Jews who came to make the request, as above, may not have had more than a quarter of an hour's difference between them. But supposing you reverse the case, and that the application of the Jews preceded that of Joseph, it would then stand thus; Pilate would be astonished at the death of Jesus, as hearing it from Joseph, when the order for the bones being broken could not have been carried into execution; he suspects Joseph of an intention of taking away Jesus, previous to his being dead, and orders the Centurion to be called.

"Whether he had been any while dead."] In order to be certain it was actual death, and not merely a fainting fit, produced by extreme pain. Instead of this, the Cambridge manuscript reads, "whether he was already dead?" Erasmus speaks as if the same reading existed in other manuscripts, but with which we are unacquainted. Were these, however, Greek or Latin manuscripts? In a Latin translation, previous to Jerome, I have found something of

the kind as in that of Corvey. Those of Branchino are here defective. But I consider the reading to be wrong.

45. "He gave the body to Jesus."] Wetstein has here a remark which, as applied to Pilate, I think unjust, and unreasonable. "We may

here observe," says he, "the morals of Pilate, which were distinguished for their avarice." There can be no doubt that Pilate was avaricious, but I cannot see how the circumstance of his giving the body to Joseph, that is, for nothing, and without ransom can be quoted against him for avarice. Supposing the word " gave" not to bear so literal an interpretation, but that Pilate had received some remuneration for it, still it is not mentioned by any evangelist, and, therefore, no commentator has a right to infer it. I would rather take the opportunity of repeating, what Premontval has so judiciously remarked, that Pilate in no part of his history, which is come down to us, appears to such advantage, as in his connection with the sufferings of Jesus. He condemned Jesus from fear, but the disciples, who relate it, do so with much impartiality and mildness, so that he appears better in this unjust transaction, than in those parts which are handed down to us by Josephus,

[ocr errors]

who certainly was not favourable to him. This shows, that the evangelists did not write from feelings of party or of passion-a very extraordinary circumstance in any historian.

LUKE XXIII. 50-55.

50. "And behold, there was a man, named Joseph, a counsellor, he was a good man, and a just ;

51. "The same had not consented to the counsel and deed of them, he was of Arimathea, a city of the Jews; who also himself waited for the kingdom of God.

52. “This man went unto Pilate, and begged the body of Jesus.

53. "And he took it down, and wrapped it in linen, and laid it in a sepulchre, that was hewn in stone, wherein never man before was laid.

54. "And that day was the preparation, and the sabbath drew on.

55. "And the women also, which came with him, from Galilee, followed after, and beheld the sepulchre, and how his body was laid."

51. "The same had not consented to the counsel

from

and deed of them."] This is the This is the passage which it has been inferred that Joseph was a member of the Sanhedrim, at Jerusalem, I cannot say that this is an inevitable inference. It may be said of a man who disapproves the conduct of his own nation, even though he is not a member of the highest council in the

country, that "his not consenting" is only a gentler mode of saying, "he disapproved," and is not uncommon in ordinary life. Wetstein has shown that the word is not judicial; and indeed, if Joseph had been a member of the High Council, I should rather have expected the words," he had not given his vote," unless indeed, in such an assembly, he had been deterred by fear from attending.

54. "And that day was the preparation."] That is to say, Friday. The Cambridge manuscript reads, " and it was the day before the sabbath." Now although this is an evident comment, or marginal interpretation, which has crept into the text, yet it shows the meaning which commentators attached to the word

[blocks in formation]

"And the sabbath drew on."] This is a Syriasm, which I have amply illustrated in my introduction to the New Testament.

JOHN XIX. 38-42.

58." And after this, Joseph of Arimathea, being a disciple of Jesus, but secretly for fear of the Jews, besought Pilate, that he might take away the body of Jesus; and Pilate gave him leave. He came, therefore, and took the body of Jesus.

39. "And there came also Nicodemus, which, at the first,

« PreviousContinue »