§ 112. The time is specified in John 12: 12. The other Evangelists do not notice the fact that Jesus had remained at Bethany the preceding night. [Matt. 21: 14-16, which Dr. Robinson places in this section, has been transferred to § 113. On this day our Lord seems to have simply entered and looked about the temple.]

§ 113. Mark 11: 11, 12 specifies the time very exactly. On the cleansing of the temple, see the Note on § 21.

Luke 21: 37, 38 is inserted here, because in Luke's order it is only retrospective, being placed after our Lord's discourses on the Mount of Olives, when he had already taken leave of the temple, to which he returned no more.

§ 114-130. These sections include the numerous discourses and transactions of the third day of this week.

§ 114. The account of the withering away of the fig-tree might in itself well be connected with the preceding section. But according to Mark 11: 20 this occurrence took place on the subsequent day.

§ 123. [In the text of Matthew, v. 14 is to be omitted (so R. V.). Hence Mark 12:40 and Luke 20: 47 belong more properly to § 122, and are so placed in the revised edition of the Greek Harmony.]

§ 125. This incident of the Greeks is inserted here, on the third day of the week, because of John 12: 36, which implies that Jesus afterwards appeared no more in public as a teacher. He immediately takes leave of the temple.

§ 126. The Evangelist John here gives his own reflections upon the unbelief of the Jews. From v. 44 we are not to understand that Jesus, after having left the temple, returned and uttered this additional discourse. It is rather the vivid manner of the Evangelist himself; who thus introduces Jesus as speaking, in order to recapitulate the sum and substance of his teaching, which the Jews had rejected.

§§ 127-130. The topics of these sections are more fully discussed in an article by the author of this work, in the Bibliotheca Sacra, 1843, No. III. pp. 531 sq. [The very difficult questions respecting the interpretation of this discourse on the Mount of Olives are more properly discussed in commentaries.]

§ 127. Our Lord takes leave of the temple, to which he returns no more; at the same time foretelling its impending destruction. On his way to Bethany, he seats himself for a time upon the Mount of Olives, over against the temple, where the city was spread out before him as on a map and here four of his disciples put to him the question, “When shall these things be?" According to Matthew they add : "And what the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?" They were still in darkness, and believed, like the other Jews, that the Messiah was yet to go forth as an exalted temporal prince, to subvert the then present order of things, to overthrow their enemies and subdue all nations, and thus restore preeminency and glory to the Jewish people, and reign in peace and splendor over the world; see Luke 24: 21; Acts 1:6. This was the expected coming and the end of the world, or present state of things, referred to in Matt. 24: 4; as also in Luke 17: 20 sq.; 19: 11. See Biblioth. Sacra, 1. c. pp. 531-535.

Jesus does not directly answer the question of the four Apostles, but speaks of deceivers and calamities and persecutions that should arise. His language here is strictly introductory to the next section.

§ 128. That the "abomination of desolation," Matt. 24: 15, etc., refers to the Roman armies by which Jerusalem was besieged and destroyed is shown conclusively by Luke 21 : 20.

The subsequent desolation and calamity spoken of in Matt. 24 : 29-31 and the parallel passages may be most appropriately referred to the overthrow and complete extirpation of the Jewish people fifty years later under Adrian, when they were sold as slaves and utterly driven out from the land of their fathers. See Münter's Jewish War, Leips. 1821; translated by W. W. Turner in the Bibliotheca Sacra, 1843, p. 393 sq. Comp. ibid. p. 550 sq. This was the final war and catastrophe of the Jewish nation under the celebrated and mysterious Bar Cochba, "Son of a Star.' It was a catastrophe far more terrible than the destruction of Jerusalem: though the latter, in consequence of the vivid description of it by Josephus, has come to be usually considered as the last act in this great tragedy. Such, however, it was not. [The use of the word "immediately" in Matt. 24: 29 favors the reference accepted by Dr. Robinson; but most commentators find in the paragraph that follows

(so in parallel passages) a reference to the second coming of Christ, which becomes the exclusive reference toward the close of the discourse.]

The figurative language of these verses is similar to that of many passages in the Old Testament which refer to civil commotions and historical events of far less importance than the destruction of Jerusalem and the overthrow of the Jewish state; comp. Is. 139 sq.; 19: 1, 5 sq.; 34: 2, 4 sq.; Ezek. 32: 2, 7; Ps. 18: 7-14; 687 sq.; 77: 15 sq., etc. Comp. Rev. 6: 12 sq.; and see also Biblioth. Sacr. 1843, p. 545 sq. Further, Luke 21: 28 shows decisively that these verses cannot have reference to the general judgment of the great and final day; the language of Luke directly expresses temporal deliverance, and that only; comp. also John 11: 52; Matt. 23: 37; Luke 13: 34. That some near catastrophe is meant appears also from the limitation to "this generation;" Matt. 24 : 34, and the parallel passages.

Matt. 24: 36-42 connects itself directly with what precedes; see v. 36; and refers likewise to the overthrow of the Jewish people and dispensation; comp. Luke 17 : 20-37. But with v. 42 of Matthew all direct reference to the Jewish catastrophe terminates. This appears from the nature of the language; and also further from the fact that thus far both Mark and Luke give parallel reports; while at this very point their reports cease, and all that follows belongs to Matthew alone. This goes to show that the discourse of our Lord up to this point is to be regarded as a whole, which is here completed; having reference to his coming for the overthrow of Judaism. At this point a new topic is introduced.

§§ 129, 130. Our Lord here makes a transition, and proceeds to speak of his final coming at the day of judgment. This appears from the fact, that the matter of these sections is added by Matthew after Mark and Luke have ended their parallel reports relative to the Jewish catastrophe ; and Matthew here commences, with v. 43, the discourse which Luke has given on another occasion; Luke 12:39 sq.; see in § 52. This discourse in Luke has reference obviously to our Lord's final coming; and that it has here the same reference is apparent from the appropriateness of the subsequent warnings, and their intimate connection with Matt. 25: 21-46; which latter all interpreters of note agree in referring to the general judgment. Up to this point, further, all is destruction to evil-doers, the overthrow of persecuting Judaism; but henceforth all refers to the trial and final separation of the righteous and the wicked. See Biblioth. Sac. 1. c. p. 553 sq.

§ 131. On the fourth [perhaps on the evening of the third] day of the week the chief priests and others, after deliberation, came to the formal conclusion to seize Jesus and put him to death; Matt. 26: 3, 4, etc. As the means by which this purpose was aided and accomplished, the first three Evangelists narrate the treacherous intent of Judas; which again two of them introduce by describing the circumstances under which it arose during the supper at Bethany. [See Notes on § 111, where will be found Dr. Robinson's reasons for placing the supper at this point, and those of the editor for accepting the position assigned to it by John. It seems impossible to find a place for it on Wednesday evening, if the discourses in the temple and on the Mount of Olives were uttered that day. But the other events recorded in this section probably occurred on Tuesday evening (comp. "after two days," Matt. 26: 2), possibly in part while our Lord delivered the discourse on the Mount of Olives. Dr. Robinson places them on the evening when that discourse was delivered, but by accepting a day later fails to give room for an interval of "two days," even by the shortest mode of reckoning, since the time of day was probably after sunset. As intimated in the Schedule of Days, Wednesday was spent in retirement at Bethany.]

§ 132. "The first day of unleavened bread" is here the fourteenth of Nisan ; on which day, at or before noon, the Jews were accustomed to cease from labor and put away all leaven out of their houses; Ex. 12: 15-17. On that day towards sunset the paschal lamb was killed; and was eaten the same evening, after the fifteenth of Nisan had begun, at which time, strictly, the festival of unleavened bread commenced, to continue seven days. In popular usage, however, the fourteenth day, being thus a day of preparation, was spoken of as belonging to the festival; and therefore is here called the "first" day. That such a usage was common appears also from Josephus, who, having in one place expressly fixed the commencement

of the festival of unleavened bread on the fifteenth of Nisan (Ant. iii. 10, § 5), speaks nevertheless in another passage of the fourteenth as the day of that festival; B. J. v. 3, § 1; comp. Ant. xi. 4, § 8. In this way, further, the same historian could say literally, that the festival was celebrated for eight days; Jos. Ant. ii. 15, § 1.

On this fifth day of the week, as the circumstances show, our Lord, after sending Peter and John to the city to prepare the Passover, himself followed them thither with the other disciples, probably towards evening.

On the Passover in general, see the Introd. Note to Part VIII.

PART VIII.

THE FOURTH PASSOVER; OUR LORD'S PASSION; AND THE ACCOMPANYING EVENTS UNTIL THE END OF THE JEWISH SABBATH.

§§ 133-158.

INTRODUCTORY NOTE. THE PASSOVER.

[THIS Note has been slightly abridged, but not otherwise modified.]

As the events of our Lord's Passion were intimately connected with the celebration of the Passover, those circumstances relating to that festival which may serve to illustrate the sacred history are here brought together. A more complete article upon this whole subject (of which the following Note is an abstract) was published by the author of these Notes in the Bibliotheca Sacra for August, 1845, pp. 405-436, to which the reader is referred. See also Greek Harmony, pp. 243 sq., revised

edition.

I. Time of killing the Paschal Lamb. The paschal lamb (or kid, Ex. 12: 5) was to be selected on the tenth day of the first month, Ex. 12: 3. On the fourteenth day of the same month (called Abib in the Pentateuch, and later Nisan; Deut. 16: 1; Esth. 3: 7) the lamb thus selected was to be killed, at a point of time designated by the expression between the two evenings, as in the marginal reading of the A. V.; Ex. 12:6; Lev. 23 : 5; Num. 9 : 3,5; or, as is elsewhere said, at evening about the going down of the sun; Deut. 16: 6. The same phrase, between the two evenings, is put for the time of the daily evening sacrifice; Ex. 29: 39, 41; Num. 28: 4. The time thus marked was regarded by the Samaritans and Karaites as being the interval between sunset and deep twilight; while the Pharisees and Rabbinists held the first evening to commence with the declining sun, and the second evening with the setting sun. Hence, according to them, the paschal lamb was to be killed in the interval between the ninth and eleventh hour, equivalent to our three and five o'clock P. M. That this was in fact the practice among the Jews in the time of our Lord appears from the testimony of Josephus; B. J. vi. 9, § 3. The daily evening sacrifice also was offered at the ninth hour, or three o'clock P. M.; Jos. Ant. xiv. 4, § 3. See Acts 3:1.

The true time, then, of killing the Passover in our Lord's day was between the ninth and eleventh hour, or towards sunset, near the close of the fourteenth day of Nisan.

II. Time of eating the Passover. This was to be done the same evening. "And they shall eat the flesh in that night, roast with fire, and unleavened bread, and with bitter herbs shall they eat it;" Ex. 12:8. The Hebrews in Egypt ate the first Passover, and struck the blood of the victims on their door-posts, on the evening before the last great plague; at midnight the Lord smote all the first-born; and in the morning the people broke up from Rameses on their march towards the Red Sea, namely, "on the fifteenth day of the first month, on the morrow after the Passover;" Num. 33: 3.

Hence the paschal lamb was to be slain in the afternoon of the fourteenth day of the month, and was eaten the same evening; that is, on the evening which was reckoned to and began the fifteenth day.

III. Festival of Unleavened Bread. From Ex. 12: 17, 18, comp. Deut. 16 : 3, 4 ; and from Lev. 23: 6, comp. Num. 28:17, it appears that the festival of unleavened bread began strictly with the Passover-meal, at or after sunset following the

fourteenth day of Nisan, and continued until sunset at the end of the twenty-first day. Comp. Jos. Ant. iii. 10, § 5.

We have already seen that it was customary for the Jews, on the fourteenth day of Nisan, to cease from labor at or before mid-day; to put away all leaven out of their houses before noon; and to slay the paschal lamb towards the close of the day; see above, and Note on § 132. Hence, in popular usage, the fourteenth day came very naturally to be reckoned as the beginning or first day of the festival; Matt. 26 : 17; Mark 14: 12; and Josephus also could say that the festival was celebrated for eight days; see Note on § 132.

It is hardly necessary to remark that, in consequence of the close mutual relation between the Passover and the festival of unleavened bread, these terms are often used interchangeably, especially in Greek, for the whole festival, including both the paschal supper and the seven days of unleavened bread; see Luke 22: 1; John 6: 4; Acts 12: 3, 4; Jos. Ant. ii. 1, § 3, comp. B. J. v. 3, § 1.

IV. Other Paschal Sacrifices. 1. In Num. 28: 18-25 it is prescribed that on the first and last days of the festival, the fifteenth and twenty-first of Nisan, there should be a holy convocation, in which "no servile work" should be done. And on each of the seven days, besides the ordinary daily sacrifices of the sanctuary, there was to be "a burnt offering unto the Lord; two young bullocks, and one ram, and seven he-lambs of the first year;" also a meat offering, and "one goat for a sin offering." The first and last days of the festival, therefore, were each a day of convocation and of rest, and hence were strictly Sabbaths, distinct from the weekly Sabbath, except when one of them happened to fall upon this latter.

2. On the morrow after this first day of rest or Sabbath, that is, on the sixteenth day of Nisan, the first fruits of the harvest were offered, together with a lamb as a burnt offering; Lev. 23: 10-12. This rite is expressly assigned by Josephus, in like manner, to the second day of the festival, the sixteenth of Nisan; Ant. iii. 10, § 5. The grain offered was barley, this being the earliest ripe, and its harvest occurring a week or two earlier than that of wheat; Jos. 1. c.; Bibl. Res. in Palest. II. p. 99. Until this offering was made, no husbandman could begin his harvest, nor might any one eat of the new grain; Lev. 23: 14. It was therefore a rite of great importance, and in the time of our Lord and later was performed with many ceremonies. See Biblioth. Sacra, 1. c. p. 498.

3. There was also another sacrifice connected with the Passover, known among the later Hebrews as the Khagigah, or festival, of which there are traces likewise in the Old Testament. It was a festive thank offering (Engl. Vers. "peace offering"), made by private individuals or families, in connection with the Passover, but distinct from the appointed public offerings of the temple. Such voluntary sacrifices or freewill offerings were provided for and regulated by the Mosaic law. The fat only was burned on the altar (Lev. 3 : 3, 9, 14); the priest had for his portion the breast and right shoulder (Lev. 7: 29-34; 10: 14); and the remainder was eaten by the bringer with his family and friends in a festive manner, on the same or the next day; Lev. 7:16-18; 22: 29, 30; Deut. 12 : 17, 18, 27; 27: 7. These private sacrifices were often connected with the public festivals, both in honor of the same, and as a matter of convenience; Num. 10: 10; Deut. 14:26; 16: 11, 14; comp. 1 Sam. 1 : 3-5, 24, 25; 2: 12-16, 19. They might be eaten in any clean place within the city (Lev. 10: 14; Deut. 16: 11, 14); but those only might partake of them, as likewise of the Passover, who were themselves ceremonially clean; Num. 18: 11, 13; John 11: 55; comp. Num. 9: 10-13; 2 Chr. 30: 18; Jos. B. J. vi. 9, § 3.

Such voluntary private sacrifices in connection with the Passover seem to be implied in the Old Testament, in Deut. 16: 2; 2 Chr. 30: 22, 24; 35: 7–9; see more in Biblioth. Sacra, 1. c. p. 409 sq. Hence being a sacrifice, thus connected with a festival, these private free-will offerings were themselves called, at least by the later Hebrews, by the name Khagigah, that is, a festival. The earlier Rabbins connect the Khagigah directly with Deut. 16: 2 as above; Lightfoot, Hor. Heb. on John 18: 28. There was, however, some difference of opinion among them as to the particular day of the paschal festival on which Khagigah ought to be offered, whether on the fourteenth or fifteenth of Nisan; but the weight of authority was greatly in favor of the fifteenth day. Yet the later accounts of the mode of celebrating the paschal_supper seem to imply that a Khagigah was ordinarily connected with that meal. Indeed,

mention is made of a "Khagigah of the fourteenth day," so called in distinction from the more important and formal ceremonial Khagigah of the Passover-festival; which latter was not regularly offered until the fifteenth day, when the paschal supper had already been eaten. The former was then a mere voluntary oblation of thanksgiving, made for the purpose of enlarging and diversifying the Passover-meal. See Lightfoot, Ministerium Templi, xiii. § 4 and xiv; Reland, Antiqq. Sac. iv. § 2, 2.

V. The Paschal Supper. For a full account of this meal, both in its original institution and as it was probably celebrated in the time of our Lord, see Biblioth. Sacra, 1. c. p. 144 sq. That the Jews in the course of ages had neglected some of the original precepts, and also introduced various additional ceremonies, is evident from the manner in which our Lord celebrated the supper, as narrated by the Evangelists. What all these additions were, we have no specific historical account from contemporary writers; yet the precepts preserved in the Mishnah and Talmud of Jerusalem (compiled in the third century from earlier traditions) probably refer to the most important of them, and serve to throw light upon some of the circumstances connected with the institution of the Lord's supper. See Biblioth. Sacra, 1. c. p. 411 sq. According to these authorities, four cups of red wine, usually mingled with one fourth part of water, were drunk during the meal, and served to mark its progress. The first was merely preliminary, in connection with a blessing invoked upon the day aud upon the wine; and this corresponds to the cup mentioned in Luke 22: 17. Then followed ablutions, and the bringing in of bitter herbs, the unleavened bread, the roasted lamb, and also the Khagigah of the fourteenth day, and a broth or sauce made with spices. After this followed the instructions to the son, etc., respecting the Passover: and the first part of the Hallel, or song of praise (Pss. 113, 114), was repeated. The second cup was now drunk. Next came the blessing upon each kind of food, and the guests partook of the meal reclining; the paschal lamb being eaten last. Thanks were then returned, and the third cup was drunk, called the cup of blessing; comp. 1 Cor. 10: 16. The remainder of the Hallel (Pss. 115-118) was now repeated and the fourth cup drunk; which was ordinarily the end of the celebration. Sometimes a fifth cup might be added, after repeating the great Hallel (Pss. 120-137). The institution of the Eucharist probably took place at the close of the proper meal, immediately before the third cup, or cup of blessing, which would seem to have made part of it; comp. 1 Cor. 10:16.

VI. Did our Lord, the night in which he was betrayed, eat the Passover with his Disciples? Had we only the testimony of the first three Evangelists, not a doubt upon this question could ever arise. Their language (see § 132) is full, explicit, and decisive, to the effect that our Lord's last meal with his disciples was the regular and ordinary paschal supper of the Jews, introducing the festival of unleavened bread, on the evening after the fourteenth day of Nisan. Mark says expressly, 14: 12: when THEY killed [R. V. sacrificed] the Passover; which, whether the subject they refer to the Jews or be indefinite, implies at least the regular and ordinary time of killing the paschal lamb. Luke's language is, if possible, still stronger, 22: 7: "Then came the day of unleavened bread, when the Passover MUST be killed [R. V. sacrificed]," that is, according to law and custom. This marks, of course, the fourteenth day of Nisan; and on that same evening our Lord and his disciples sat down to that same Passover-meal, which had thus by his own appointment been prepared for them, and of which Jesus speaks expressly as the Passover, v. 15. Philologically considered, there cannot be a shadow of doubt that Matthew, Mark, and Luke intended to express, and do express, in the plainest terms, their testimony to the fact that Jesus regularly partook of the ordinary and legal Passover-meal on the evening after the fourteenth of Nisan, at the same time with all the Jews. ["John himself clearly points to the fifteenth of Nisan, as the day of the crucifixion, when he reports that the customary release of a prisoner at the Passover' was granted by Pilate on the day of crucifixion; 18: 39, 40." Schaff, History Christian Church, I. p. 134, new ed.]

When, however, we turn to the Gospel of John, we seek in vain in this Evangelist for any trace of the paschal supper, as such, in connection with our Lord at that time. John narrates indeed (chap. 13) our Lord's last meal with his disciples; which the attendant and subsequent circumstances show to have been the same with that which the other Evangelists describe as the Passover. Upon just that point, indeed,