been known to any other being. The Holy Ghost, &c.-This is a strong attestation to the inspiration of David, and accords with the uniform testimony of the New Testament, that the sacred writers spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. (2 Pet. i. 21.) Concerning Judas. -In what respect this was concerning Judas, see ver. 20. Which was guide, &c.-Matt. xxvi. 47. John xviii. 3.

VER. 18. For he was numbered with us, and had obtained part of this ministry.

w Luke vi. 16.

He was numbered with us.-He was chosen as an apostle by the Lord Jesus. (Luke vi. 13-16.) This does not mean that he was a true Christian, but that he was reckoned among the apostles. Jesus knew that he never loved him. Long before he betrayed him, he declared that he was a devil. (John vi. 70.) He knew his whole character when he chose him. (John ii. 25.) If it be asked why he chose such a man to be an apostle; why he was made the treasurer of the apostles, and was admitted to the fullest confidence; we may reply, that a most important object was gained in having such a man-a spy-among them. It might be pretended when the apostles bore testimony to the purity of life, of doctrine, and of purpose, of the Lord Jesus, that they were interested and partial friends; that they might be disposed to suppress some of his real sentiments, and represent him in a light more favourable than the truth. Hence the testimony of such a man as Judas, if favourable, must be invaluable. It would be free from the charge of partiality. If Judas knew anything unfavourable to the character of Jesus, he would have communicated it to the Sanhedrim. If he knew of any secret plot against the government, or seditious purpose, he had every inducement to declare it. He had every opportunity to know it he was with him; heard him converse; was a member of his family, and admitted to terms of familiarity. Yet even Judas could not be bought, or bribed, to testify against the moral character of the Saviour. If he had done it, or could have done it, it would have preserved him from the charge of treason; entitled him to the reputation of a public benefactor, in discovering secret sedition; and have saved him from the pangs of remorse, and from self-murder. Judas would have done it if he could. But he alleged no such charge; he did not even dare to lisp a word against the pure designs of the Lord Jesus; and his own pangs and death are the highest proof that can be desired of his conviction that the betrayed Redeemer was innocent. Judas would have been just the witness which the Jews desired of the treasonable purposes of Jesus. But that could not be had, even by gold; and they were compelled to suborn other men to testify against the Son of God. (Matt. xxvi. 60.) We may just add here, that the introduction of such a character as that of Judas Iscariot into the number of the apostles, and the use to be made of his testimony, would never have occurred to an impostor. An impostor would have

Now this man, &c.-The money which was given for betraying the Lord Jesus, was thrown down in the temple, and the field was purchased with it by the Jewish priests. See Matt. xxvii. 5-10, and the Notes on that place. A man is said often to do a thing, when he furnishes the means for doing it. The reward of iniquity.The price which he had for that deed of stupendous wickedness-the betraying of the Lord Jesus. And falling headlong.-He first hanged himself, and then fell, and was burst asunder. (Matt. xxvii. 5.)

VER. 19. And it was known unto all the dwellers at Jerusalem; insomuch as that field is called in their proper tongue, Aceldama, that is to say, The field of blood.

It was known, &c.-(Matt. xxvii. 8.) The scene in the temple; the acts of the priests in purchasing the field, &c. would make it known; and the name of the field would preserve the memory of the guilt of Judas. Their proper tongue.-The language spoken by the Jews-the Syro-chaldaic. Aceldama.-This is composed of two Syro-chaldaic words, and means literally, the field of blood.

VER. 20. For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein and his bishopric let another take.

≈ Psa. lxix. 25. a Psa. cix. 8. b Or, office; or, charge.

For it is written, &c.-See Psa. lxix. 25. This is the prediction, doubtless, to which Peter refers in ver. 16.-The intermediate passage in ver. 18, 19, is probably a parenthesis; the words of Luke, not of Peter. It is not probable that Peter would introduce a narrative like this, with which they were all familiar, in an address to the disciples. The Hebrew in the Psalm is, "Let their habitation, (Heb. "fold, enclosure for cattle; tower, or palace,") be desolate, and let none dwell in their tents." This quotation is not made literally from the Hebrew, nor from the Septuagint. The plural is changed to the singular, and there are some other slight variations. The Hebrew says, "Let no men dwell in their tents." The reference to the tents is omitted in the quotation. The term habitation, in the Psalm, means evidently the dwelling-place

B

of the enemies of the writer of the Psalm. It is an image expressive of their overthrow and defeat by a just God, "let their families be scattered, and the places where they have dwelt be without an inhabitant, as a reward for their crimes." If the Psalm was originally composed with reference to the Messiah and his sufferings, the expression here was not intended to denote Judas in particular, but one of his foes, who was to meet the just punishment of rejecting, and betraying, and murdering him. The change, therefore, which Peter made from the plural to singular; and the application, to Judas especially, as one of those enemies, accords with the design of the Psalm, and is such a change as the circumstances of the case justified and required. It is an image, therefore, expressive of judgment and desolation coming upon his betrayer an image to be literally fulfilled in relation to his habitation, drawn from the desolation when a man is discomfited, overthrown, and his dwelling-place given up to desolation. It is not a little remarkable that this Psalm is repeatedly quoted as referring to the Messiah. Ver. 9, "The zeal of their house hath eaten me up," expressly applied to Christ in John ii. 17. Ver. 21, "They gave me also gall for my meat; and in my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink." The thing which was done to Jesus on the cross. (Matt. xxvii. 34.) The whole Psalm is expressive of deep sorrow-of persecution, contempt, weeping, being forsaken, and is throughout applicable to the Messiah; with what is remarkable, not a single expression to be, of necessity, limited to David. It is not easy to ascertain whether the ancient Jews referred this Psalm to the Messiah. A part of the title to the Psalm in the Syriac version is, "It is called a prophecy concerning those things which Christ suffered, and concerning the casting away of the Jews." The prophecy in ver. 25, is not to be understood of Judas alone, but of the enemies of the Messiah in general, of which Judas was one. On this principle, the application to Judas of the passage by Peter, is to be defended. And his bishopric let another take.-This is quoted from Psa. cix. 8; "Let his days be few, and let another take his office." This is called "a Psalm of David," and is of the same class as Psa. vi. xxii. xxv. xxxviii. xlii. This class of Psalms is commonly supposed to have expressed David's feelings in the calamitous times of the persecution by Saul, the rebellion of Absalom, &c. They are all also expressive of the condition of a suffering and persecuted Messiah; and are many of them applied to him in the New Testament. The general principle on which most of them are applicable is, not that David personated or typified the Messiah, which is nowhere affirmed, and which can be true in no intelligible sense; but that he was placed in circumstances similar to the Messiah: encompassed with like enemies; persecuted in the same manner. They are expressive of high rank, office, dignity, and piety, cast down, waylaid, and encompassed with enemies. In this way they express general sentiments as much applicable to the case of the Messiah, as to David. They were placed in similar circumstances. The same help was

needed. The same expressions would convey their feelings. The same treatment was proper for their enemies. On this principle it was that David deemed his enemy, whoever he was, unworthy of his office; and desired that it should be given to another. In like manner, Judas had rendered himself unworthy of his office, and there was the same propriety that it should be given to another. And as the office had now become vacant by the death of Judas, and according to one declaration in the Psalms; so according to another, it was proper that it should be conferred on some other person. The word rendered "office" in the Psalm, means the_care, charge, business, oversight of any thing. It is a word applicable to magistrates, whose care it is to see the laws executed; to military men who have charge of an army, or part of an army. In Job x. 12, it is rendered "thy visitation," thy care. In Num. iv. 16; "and to the office of Eleazer," &c. (2 Kings xi. 18.) In the case of David, it refers to those who were intrusted with military or other offices, and who had treacherously perverted them to persecute and oppose him; and thus shown themselves unworthy of the office. The Greek word which is used here,

коv, is taken from the Septuagint, and means the same thing as the Hebrew. It is well rendered in the margin, "office, or charge," It means charge of any kind, or office, without in itself specifying of what kind. It is the concrete of the noun TOKоTOс, commonly translated "bishop," and means his office, charge, or duty. That word designates simply having the oversight of any thing, and as applied to the officers of the New Testament, it denotes merely their having charge of the affairs of the church, without specifying the nature or the extent of their jurisdiction. Hence it is often interchanged with presbyter, or elder, and expresses the discharge of the duties of the same office. (Acts xx. 28.) "Take heed, (presbyters or elders, ver. 17,) to yourselves, and to all the flock over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers,"πLOKOTоvc-bishops. (Heb. xii. 15.)

Looking diligently," &c. TOKоTOUVTEC, Phil. i. 1, with the bishops and deacons." "Paul called presbyters, bishops; for they had at that time the same name."-Theodoret, as quoted by Schleusner. 1 Pet. v. 2, "Feed the flock of God, (i. e. you who are elders, or presbyters, v. 1,) taking the oversight thereof," LOKOTOVYτες. These passages show that the term in the New Testament designates the supervision or care which was exercised over the church, by whomsoever performed, without specifying the nature or extent of the jurisdiction. It is scarcely necessary to add, that Peter here did not intend to affirm that Judas sustained any office, corresponding to what is now commonly understood by the term "bishop."

VER. 21. Wherefore of these men which have companied with us, all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us,

22. Beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from

Wherefore of these men. Of those who had witnessed the life and works of Christ, and who were therefore qualified to discharge the duties of the office from which Judas fell. Probably Peter refers to the seventy disciples. (Luke x. 1, 2.) Went in and out.-A phrase signifying that he was their constant companion. It expresses in general all the actions of the life. (Psa. cxxi. 8. Deut. xxviii. 19; xxxi. 2.) Beginning from the baptism of John.-The words "beginning from," in the original, refer to the Lord Jesus. The meaning may be thus expressed, "during all the time in which the Lord Jesus, beginning (his ministry) at the time when he was baptized by John, went in and out among us, until the time when he was taken up," &c. From those who had during that time been the constant companions of the Lord Jesus, must one be taken, who would thus be a witness of his whole ministry. Must one be ordained.-It is fit or proper that one should be ordained. The reason of this was, that Jesus had originally chosen the number twelve for this work, and as one of them had fallen, it was proper that the breach should be filled by some person equally qualified for the office. The reason why it was proper that he should be taken from the seventy disciples was, that they had been particularly distinguished by Jesus himself, and commanded to preach, and endowed with various powers, and had been witnesses of his public life. (Luke x. 1-16.) The word "ordained" with us has a fixed and definite meaning. It denotes to set apart to a sacred office with the proper form and solemnities, commonly by the imposition of hands. But this is not of necessity the meaning of this passage. The Greek word usually denoting "ordination," is not used here. The expression is literally, "must one be, or become, yeverbal, a witness with us of his resurrection." The expression does not imply that he must be set apart in any particular manner, but simply that one should be designated, or appointed for this specific purpose, to be a witness of the resurrection of Christ

And they appointed two.-They proposed, or as we should say, nominated two. Literally, they placed two, or made them to stand forth, as persons do who are candidates for office. These two were probably more distinguished by prudence, wisdom, piety and age, than the others; and were so nearly equal in qualifications, that they could not determine which was the best fitted for the office. Joseph called Barsabas, &c. -It is not certainly known what the name Barsabas denotes. The Syriac word "Bar" means son," and the word "Sabas" has been translated "an oath, rest, quiet or captivity." Why the name

was given to Joseph is not known; but probably it was the family name-Joseph son of Sabæ. Some have conjectured that this was the same man who, in chap. iv. 36, is called Barnabas. But of this there is no proof. Lightfoot supposes that he was the son of Alpheus, and brother of James the Less, and that he was chosen on account of his relationship to the family of the Lord Jesus. Was surnamed Justus.-Who was called Justus. This is a Latin name, meaning just, and was probably given him on account of his distinguished integrity. It was not uncommon among the Jews for a man to have several names. (Matt. x. 3.) And Matthias.-Nothing is known of the family of this man or of his character, further than that he was numbered with the apostles, and shared their lot in the toils, and persecutions, and honours of preaching the gospel to mankind.

VER. 24. And they prayed, and said, Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men, shew whether of these two thou hast chosen,

e Jer. xvii. 10. Rev. ii. 23.

And they prayed.-As they could not agree on the individual, they invoked the direction of God in their choice-an example which should be followed in every selection of an individual to exercise the duties of the sacred office of the ministry. Which knowest the hearts of all men.This is often declared to be the peculiar prerogative of God. Jer. xvii. 10, "I, Jehovah, search the heart," &c. (Psa. cxxxix. 1—23. 1 Chron. xxviii. 9.) Yet this attribute is also expressly ascribed to Jesus Christ. Rev. ii. 18, comp. 23. "These things saith the Son of God-I am he which searcheth the reins and the hearts." (John ii. 25; vi. 64; xvi. 19.) There are strong reasons for supposing that the apostles on this occasion addressed this prayer to the Lord Jesus Christ. (1.) The name "Lord" is the common appellation which they gave to him. (Acts ii. 36; vii. 59, 60; x. 36. Phil. ii. 11. Rev. xi. 8, &c.) told that they worshipped him, or rendered him divine honours after his ascension. (Luke xxiv. 52.) (3.) The disciples were accustomed to address him after his crucifixion by the names Lord, or God, indifferently. (Acts i. 6. John xx.

28.

1 Cor. ii. 8. (2.) We are

Acts. vii. 59.) (4.) This was a matter pertaining especially to the church which the Lord Jesus had redeemed, and to his own arrangement in regard to it. He had chosen the apostles; he had given them their commission; he had fixed their number; and what is worthy of special remark here, he had been the companion of the very men, and knew their qualifications for their work. If the apostles ever called on the Lord Jesus after his ascension, this was the case in which they would be likely to do it. That it was done, is clear from the account of the death of Stephen. (Acts vii. 59, 60.) And in this important matter of ordaining a new apostle, to be a witness for Jesus Christ, nothing was more natural than that they should address him, though bodily absent, as they would assuredly have done if he were present. And if on this occasion they

did actually address Christ, then two things clearly follow. First, that it is proper to render him divine homage, agreeably to the uniform declarations of the Scripture; John v. 23, "That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father." Heb. i. 6, "And let all the angels of God worship him." (Phil. ii. 10, 11. Rev. v. 8-14. 1 Thess. iii. 11. 12.) Secondly, he must be divine. To none other but God can religious homage be rendered; and none other can be described as knowing the hearts of all men. The reason why they appealed to him on this occasion as the searcher of the heart, was doubtless the great importance of the work to which the successor of Judas was to be called. One apostle of fair external character had proved a traitor; and with this fact full before them, they appealed to the Saviour himself, to select one who would be true to him, and not bring dishonour on his cause. Show whether, &c.-Show which of them. Thou hast chosen.-Not by any public declaration, but which of the two thou hast judged to be best qualified for the work, and hast fitted for it.

VER. 25. That he may take part of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place.

That he may take part of this ministry.-The word rendered "part," Aйpov, is the same which in the next verse is rendered lots. It properly means a lot, or portion; the portion divided to a man, or assigned to him by casting lots; and also the instrument or means by which the lot is made. The former is its meaning here; the office, or portion of apostolic work which would fall to him by taking the place of Judas. Ministry and apostleship.-This is an instance of the figure of speech hendiadys, when two words are used to express one thing. It means the apostolic ministry. See instances in Gen. i. 14, "Let them be for signs and for seasons," i. e. signs of seasons. Acts xxiii. 6, "Hope and resurrection of the dead," i. e. hope of the resurrection of the dead. That he might go to his own place. These words by different interpreters have been referred both to Matthias and Judas. Those who refer them to Matthias say that they mean, that Judas fell that Matthias might go to his own place, that is, to a place for which he was fitted, or well qualified. But to this there are many objections. (1.) The apostolic office could with no propriety be called, in reference to Matthias, his own place, until it was actually conferred on him. (2.) There is no instance in which the expression "to go to his own place" is applied to a successor in office. (3.) It is not true that the design or reason why Judas fell was to make way for another. He fell by his crimes; his avarice, his voluntary and enormous wickedness. (4.) The former part of the sentence contains this sentiment: "Another must be appointed to this office which the death of Judas has made vacant." If this expression, "that he might go," &c., refers to the successor of Judas, it expresses the same sentiment, but more obscurely. (5.) The

obvious and natural meaning of the phrase is to refer it to Judas. But those who suppose it to refer to Judas differ greatly about its meaning. Some suppose it refers to his own house; that he left the apostolic office to return to his own house; and they appeal to Numbers xxiv. 25. But it is not true that Judas did this; nor is there the least proof that it was his design. Others refer it to the grave, as the place of man, where all must lie; and particularly as an ignominious place where Judas should lie. But there is no example of the word "place" being used in this sense; nor is there an instance where a man by being buried is said to return to his own, or proper place. Others have supposed that the nianner of his death, by hanging, is referred to, as his own or his proper place. But this interpretation is evidently an unnatural and forced one. The word "place" cannot be applied to an act of selfmurder. It denotes habitation, abode, situation in which to remain; not an act. These are the only interpretations which can be suggested of the passage, except the common and obvious one of referring it to the future abode of Judas in the world of wo. This might be said to be his own, as it was adapted to him; as he had prepared himself for it; and as it was proper that he who had betrayed his Lord should remain there. This interpretation may be defended by the following considerations: (1.) It is the obvious and natural meaning of the words. It commends itself by its simplicity, and its evident connexion with the context. It has in all ages been the common interpretation; nor has any other been adopted unless there was a theory to be defended about future punishment. Unless men had previously made up their minds not to believe in future punishment, no one would ever have thought of any other interpretation. This fact alone throws strong light on the meaning of the passage. (2.) It accords with the crimes of Judas, and with all that we know of him. The future doom of Judas was not unknown to the apostles. Jesus Christ had expressly declared this; "it had been good for that man if he had not been born;" a declaration which could not be true if, after any limited period of suffering, he were at last admitted to eternal happiness. See Matt. xxvi. 24, and the Note on that place. This declaration was made in the presence of the eleven apostles, at the institution of the Lord's supper, at a time when their attention was absorbed with deep interest in what Christ said; and it was therefore a declaration which they would not be likely to forget. As they knew the fate of Judas, nothing was more natural for them than to speak of it familiarly as a thing which had actually occurred when he betrayed his Lord, hung himself, and went to his own place. (3.) The expression "to go to his own place," is one which is used by the ancient writers to denote going to the eternal destiny. Thus the Jewish Tract, "Baal Turim," on Num. xxiv. 25, says, "Balaam went to his own place, i. e. to Gehenna," to hell. Thus the Targum, or Chaldee Paraphrase on Eccl. vi. 6, says, Although the days of a man's life were two thousand years, and he did not study the law, and do justice, in the day of his death his soul shall descend to hell, to the one place where all sinners

66