Third section the judgment upon the church itself second picture of judgment

Footnotes:

FN#42 - Matthew 27:33.—Γολγοθά. is the prevailing reading. [Other readings are γολλγοθά, γολγοθθά, γολγαθῦν In Luke 23:33 the English Version, following the Vulgate, translated the Greek κρανίον cranium, a hare skull, ints the Latin calvary (calvaria). The popular expression “Mount Calvary” is not warranted by any statement of the Evangelises concerning the place of crucifixion, which was probably a small round and barren elevation of the shape of a skul;—P. S.]

FN#43 - Matthew 27:33.—Lachmann: ὅ ἐστιν κρανίου τό πος λεγό μενος. The reading ὅ is better supported than ὅς and few MSS. omit λεγόμενος Great variety in the readings [In English κρανίου τόπος should be renderer either with the definite article: the place of a skull, as the Authorized Version does in the parallel passages, Mark 15:21 and John 19:17, or without any article: Place of a skull.—P. S.]

FN#44 - Cod. Sinait. reads likewise οῖ̓νον, wine, as in Mark 15:23. But the five uncial (Sinait, B, D, K, L.) and the ten cursive MSS, which support this reading, are nearly all Alexandrine. On their side are the Egyptian and the old Latin Versions (the Vulgate: vinum, and hence the Roman Catholic Versions: wine). It is possible that οῖ̓νον was a wilful alteration to harmonize Matthew with Mark. Tischendorf and Alford adhere to the received reading: ὄξος, vinegar. The difference, of course, is only apparent. It was probably sour wine with myrrh, given to criminals to stupefy them.—P. S.]

FN#45 - Mill and Wetstein, and all the modern critical editors omit the words in question from ἵνα to κλῆρον Dr. Lange puts them in brackets. Comp. his Exeg. Notes.—P. S.]

FN#46 - Matthew 27:39.—[So Cheke, Campbell, and Scrivener render κινοῦντες. Lange: schüttelten. Norton: nodding, Conant, however, defends wagging as better expressing the contemptuous, scornful motion intended by the Evangelist.— P. S.]

FN#47 - Matthew 27:42.—Βασιλεὺς Ἰσραήλ ἐστιν. Fritzsche and Tischendorf adopt this reading, omitting the preceding εἰ, according to B, D, L, etc. The irony is thus stronger. Εἰ is probably an exegetical addition from Matthew 27:40.

FN#48 - Matthew 27:42.—The reading: πιστεύομεν αὐτῷ, according to Lachmann and his authorities, is stronger [than the text. rec.: πιστεύσομεν αὐτῷ]. The reading: ἐπ̓ αὐτῷ also, is well supported and significant. [Cod. Sinait. reads: ἐπ̓α ὐτ όν—P. S.]

FN#49 - Matthew 27:44.—[Or: upbraided or were upbraiding, Wiclif, Cheke, Doddridge, Campbell, Scrivener; or reproached, Rhemish Version, Conant, and N. T. of the Am. B. U.; or reviled him, Norton. The rendering: cast in his teeth, dates from Tyndale, and was retained in the following revisions, but would hardly be defended now.—P. S.]

FN#50 - Matthew 27:46.—The difference in the mode of writing the Hebrew words is unimportant. See Lachmann and Tischendorf. [The best authorities are in favor of lema instead of lama.—P. S.]

FN#51 - Matthew 27:49.—[This Isaiah, in modern English, the corresponding word for σ̓́φες, which must be connected with the following ἴδωμεν without comma. It is the hortatory come or wait now, and not, as is usually supposed, a rebuke: let him alone, as if they intended to stop the man who offered the vinegar. Comp. Mark 15:36, where that person himself utters the words ἄφες ἴδωμεν, in common with the rest. Lange: Lass nur, wir wollen sehen; Luther: Halt, lass sehen; van Ess: Wart! lass sehen; Ewald omits it altogether and translates simply: lass uns sehen. Conant and the Revised N. T. of the Am. Bible Union: Let alone, which invites the same popular misunderstanding as if it meant: Let him alone.—P. S.]

FN#52 - The same addition, from ἄλλος to αῖ̔μα is found in Cod. Sinait, which usually agrees with the Vatican MS.—P. S.]

FN#53 - Matthew 27:50.—[So Middleton, Campbell, Scrivener, Crosby, Conant. Better than expired, as Norton translates. The article in τό πνεῦμα is employed as a possessive pronoun. To give up the ghost, is now used in a low sense.—P. S.]

FN#54 - Meyer: “That Simon became a Christian in consequence of his carrying the cross and his presence at the crucifixion, may be inferred from Mark 15:21.” So also Alford and others.—P. S.]

FN#55 - Hieron. in Matthew 27:33 : “Golgotha, quod est calvariÆ locus. Audivi quemdam exposuisse Calvariœ locum in quo sepultus est Adam, et ideo sic appellatum esse, quia ibi antiqui hominis sit conditum caput....Favorabilis interpretatio et mulcens aurem populi, nec tamen vera. Extra urbem enim et foras portam loca sunt in quibus truncantur capita damnatorum, et Calvariœ, i.e, decollatorum sumsere nomen.”—The ancient Jewish-Christian tradition that Adam was buried where the second Adam died and rose again, is also mentioned by Origen, Tertullian, Athanasius, and Augustine, and turned to practical account. Augustine: “Quia ibi erectus sit medicus, ubi jacebat ægrotus.” Dr. Wordsworth allegorizes on Golgotha (from גָּלַל volvit hence a rolling, and a skull from its roundness), and brings it in connection with the hill Gilgal. Joshua 5:9, where Joshua had his camp and rolled away (גַּלּוֹהִי) the reproach of Egypt. So by our Jesus at Golgotha the shame and guilt of sin was rolled away from the Israel of God; and there was His camp, for He conquered by the cross. Rather far fetched.—P. S.]

FN#56 - So also Reland, Palest, p860, Bengel, Winer, Ewald, Meyer, A. Alexander. The objection of Alford and Wordsworth, that no such bill or rock is known to have existed (comp. Stanley, Palestine, p454), is hardly valid in view of the hilly and rocky character of Jerusalem and its vicinity. Ewald identifies it with “the hill Gareb,” Jeremiah 31:39; Krafft and Lange with Goath, which was without the city. Williams (Holy City, 2:240) supposes that the rock of Calvary was part of a little swell of the ground forming a somewhat abrupt brow on the west and south sides, which would afford a convenient spot for public execution, as it was sufficiently elevated to raise the sufferers above the gazing crowd —P. S.]

FN#57 - This is hardly of sufficient account. The explanation of Jerome appears to me very doubtful for three reasons: 1. The name would then be not the place of a skull (τόπος κρανίου), still less a skull simply, as in the Hebrew and in the Greek of St. Luke (κρανίον), but the place of skulls (τόπος κρανίων); 2. there is no record that the Jews had a special place for public execution; 3. it is extremely unlikely that a rich Prayer of Manasseh, like Joseph of Arimathea, should have kept a garden in such a place (for the sepulchre of Christ was near the place of crucifixion, John 19:41).—P. S.]

FN#58 - Also John Wilson, Barclay, Bonar, Stewart, Arnold, Meyer, Ewald, Sam. J. Andrews: The Life of our Lord upon the Earth, New York, 1863, p560 sqq.. and Arnold, art. in Herzog’s Encyklopädie, vol5:307 ff, where the reader will find a summary of the principal arguments on both sides of the question with special reference to Robin son and Williams, as the chief champions of the opposite views. Korte, a German bookseller, who visited Jerusalem, A. D1788, at the same time with the learned Pococke, was the first who took a stand against the supposed identity of the spot of the Holy Sepulchre with the place of the crucifixion and sepulchre of our Lord. The late Dr. Robinson, of Union Theol. Seminary, New York, strongly opposes the old tradition, and lays down the general principle “that all ecclesiastical tradition respecting the ancient places in and around Jerusalem and throughout Palestine is of no value; except as far as it is supported by circumstances known from the Scriptures or from other cotemporary testimony” (Bibl. Researches in Palestine, etc, vol1 p258,3 p 263 of the last Boston edition. Comp. also James Ferguson, art. Jerusalem, in W. Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible, vol1 p1028 sqq Ritter, Winer, Bartlett, Stanley, and Ellicott, leave the matter doubtful.—P. S.]

FN#59 - Comp. also on the same side Chateaubriand, who led the way in this century in a plausible defence of the old tradition, reasoning mainly a priori that the Christians must have known from the beginning and could never forget the places of Christ’s death and burial (Itinéraire de Paris à Jerusalem, Paris, 1811); Tischendorf (Reise in den Orient, Leipzig, 1846, vol. ii17 ff.); Geo. Finley (On the Site of the Holy Sepulchre, London, 1847); Olin; Prime; Lewin (Jerusalem, London, 1861); G. Williams (The Holy City, London, 1845; 2d ed1849, 2vols.). Dr. Alford on Matthew 27:33 does not enter into the merits of the question, but gives it as his opinion that Williams “has made a very strong case for the commonly received site of Calvary and the Sepulchre.” The question is of little practical importance. The main argument in favor of the identity is derived from the unbroken Christian tradition. But while we are reluctant to break with a tradition of such extent, it is repugnant to sound Christian feeling to believe that a spot so often profaned and disgraced by the most unworthy superstitions, impostures, and quarrels of Christian sects, should be actually the sacred spot where the Saviour died for the sins of the race. At all events the testimony of tradition in such a case is not so important as maintained by Williams when he affirms that “the credit of the whole Church for fifteen hundred years is in some measure Involved In its veracity.” The Christian Church never claimed geographical and topographical infallibility, and leaves the question of the holy places open to fair criticism. The Apostles and Evangelists barely allude to the places of Christ’s birth, death, and resurrection. They fixed their eyes upon the great facts themselves, and wershipped the exalted Saviour in heaven, where He lives for ever. It was only since the age of Constantine, in the fourth century, that those localities were abused in the service of an almost idolatrous superstition, yet not without continued protest from many of the wisest and best men of the Church. From the Gospels so much only appears with certainty as to the place of the crucifixion, that it was out of the city, Matthew 28:11; John 19:17; comp. Hebrews 13:12; yet near the city, John 19:20; apparently near a thoroughfare, as may be inferred from Mark 15:29; and that the sepulchre was near the place of the crucifixion, John 19:41, in a garden and hewn in a rock, Matthew 27:60 and the parallel passages.—P. S.]

FN#60 - Or accurately Goah, גֹּעה, the th being added to connect the Hebrew particle of motion,—Goathah. Gesenius derives it from גָּעָה, to low, or moo, as a cow. Hence also the translation of the Targum the heifer’s pool. The Syriac, on the other hand, has leromto, to the eminence, perhaps reading גֹּאָה.—P. S.]

FN#61 - “If the trial of the Lord was at the palace of Herod on Mount Sion, He could not have passed along the Via dolorosa.” Andrews, 1. c p534.—P. S.]

FN#62 - There is do necessary contradiction, as asserted by Meyer and Alford, between the “vinegar mingled with gall” of Matthew and the “wine mingled with myrrh” of Mark, since the common wine of the soldiers was little better than vinegar, and since χολή, gall, is used the Septuagint for various kinds of bitter substances. See Winer, sub Essig, vol1 p349 f.—P. S.]

FN#63 - There were three forms of the cross: 1. Crux immissa or capitata, a transverse beam crossing a perpendicular one at some distance from the top,=+. According to tradition this was the form of the Saviour’s cross, which is thus commonly represented on ancient coins and in modern pictures of the crucifixion. There is no proof of this, but it appears probable from the fact that the “title” was placed over the head. The Song of Solomon -called Greek cross is a form of the crux immissa, where the two beams cross each other in the middle, and the four arms are of equal length2. Crux commissa, a transverse beam placed on the top of a perpendicular one, resembling the letter T. 3. Crux decussata, or St. Andrew’s cross, like the letter X. The cross which appeared to Constantine, was of this form, with the Greek letter R in it, so as to represent the first two letters of the word Christos= See pictures of coins of Constantine in Baronius’ Annales ad ann. p312; in Münter’s Sinnbilder der alten Christen, p86 sqq, and the second volume of my Church History, p27 sq.—P. S.]

FN#64 - This needs explanation. The projection on the middle of the larger beam, on which the sufferer sat, a wooden pin called sedile (ἐφ̓ ῷ̔ ἐποχοῦνται οἱ οταυρούμενοι, Justin Mart Dial. c. Tryph. p818), was rather a relief, and prevented the weight of the whole body from falling upon the arms, which otherwise would soon have been torn from the nails. But in protracting the sufferings, it may be said to have been a chief source of pain.—P. S.]

FN#65 - Crucifixion was abolished as a punishment by Constantine, the first Christian emperor, no doubt under the influence of the humane spirit of Christianity, which in this and many other features improved the Roman legislation, first indirectly and then directly, from the time of Trajan and Marcus Aurelius (although these emperors were heathen and persecutors) to Justinian. Comp. the writer’s Church History, vol. ii. (now in course of publication) § 18, p107 ff.—P. S.]

FN#66 - The passage of Plautus alluded to above, reads thus: “Ego dabo ei talentum, primus qui in crucem excucurrerit, sed ea lege, ut offigantur bis pedes, bis brachia.” Here the only thing extraordinary is the repetition (bis), while the nailing of the feet itself is supposed to be the usual method. Each foot was probably nailed to the cross separately, and not both by one nail. In earlier pictures of the crucifixion, Christ was attached to the cross by three or four nails indifferently. Early tradition speaks of four nails. After the thirteenth century the practice prevailed of representing the feet as lying one over the other and both penetrated by only one nail. It is possible that the crown of thorns remained upon His head as represented by painters, since Matthew and Mark mention the removal of the purple robe by the soldiers, but not of the crown. See Friedlieb, Archæol. p145, and Andrews, Life of Christ, p538—P. S.]

FN#67 - Not: Matthew 27:17, as in the Edinb. edition, which follows the German quotations of Psalm here and elsewhere, not knowing that the German, like the Hebrew Bible, treats the inscriptions of the Psalm as part of the text and numbers them as Matthew 27:1, while the Authorized English Version separates them from the text in smaller type. Hence all the German references to Psalm, which have an inscription, must be changed to suit the English Bible. The important words referred to above are: they pierced my hands and my feet.—P. S.]

FN#68 - Dr. Christian Friedrich G. Richter. born1676, died1711, was a pious physician of the Orphan House in Halle, and the author of thirty-three excellent German hymns full of unction, several of which have passed into common use in public worship (e. g, Freuse such, erlöste Brüder; O Lisbe, die den Himmel hat serrissen; Es kostet viel, ein Christ nu sein; Es ist nicht schwer ein Christ su sein; Mein Salomo, dein freundliches Regieren; Es glünset der Christen inwendiges Leben; 0 wie selig sind die Seelen, He thus describes the physical sufferings of the crucifixion: 1. On account of the unnatural and immovable position of the body and the violent extens on of the arms, the least motion produced the most painful sensation all over the body, but especially on the lacerated back and the pierced members2. The nails caused constantly increasing pain on the most sensitive parts of the hands and feet3. Inflammation set in at the pierced members and wherever the circulation of the blood was obstructed by the violent tension of the body, and increased the agony and an intolerable thirst4. The blood rushed to the head and produced the most violent headache5. The blood in the lungs accumulated, pressing the heart, swelling all the veins, and caused nameless anguish. Loss of blood through the open wounds would have shortened the pain, but the blood clotted and ceased flowing. Death generally set in slowly, the muscles, veins, and nerves gradually growing stiff, and the vital powers sinking from exhaustion.—But all the ordinary sufferings of crucifixion give us but a faint idea of the sufferings of the sinless Godman and Redeemer of the world, which stand out solitary and alone,—the unexhausted and inexhaustible theme for meditation, gratitude, and worship to all ages and generations of the redeemed. See the excellent remarks of Dr. Lange in the text. Even the infidel Rousseau exclaimed: If Socrates lived and died like a sage, Jesus of Nazareth lived and died like a God.—P. S.]

FN#69 - I add the original of the remarkable passage of Phlegon, who was a freedman of the heathen emperor Hadrian, and wrote a Sylloge Olympionicarum et Chronicorum: Τῷ Δ ἔτει τῆς ΣΒ ὀλυμπιάδος ἐγένετο ἔκλειψις π̔λίου μεγίστη τῶν ἐγνωσμένων πρότερον, καὶ νύξ ὥρα ἕκτῃ τῆς ἡμέρας ἐγένετο, ὥστε καὶ ἀστέρας ἐν οὐρανῷ φανῆνα. Σεισμός τε μέγας κατὰ Βιθυνίαν γενόμενος τὰ πολλὰ Νικαίας κατεστρέψατο. The same passage is quoted by Julius Africanus, a. d222, In Syncellus’ Chron. 257, Ven322, Par.: φλέγων ἱστορεῖ ἐπὶ Τιβερίου Καίσαρας ἐν πανσελήνῳ (in the middle of the month) ἔκλειψιν ἡλίου γεγονέναι τελείαν ἀπὸ ὥρας ἕκτης μέχρις ἐννάτης. Another heathen historian, Thallus, as quoted by Julius Africanus, mentions the same eclipse of the sun: τοῦτο τὸ σκότος ἔκλειψιν τοῦ ἡλίου Θάλλος ὰποκαλεῖ ἐν τρίτῃ τῶν ἱστορίων. Eusebius mentions a third authority without naming it. To these testimonies must be added those of Tertullian, Origen, Rufinus, who boldly appeal to the Roman archives for the proof of the eclipse of the sun at the time of the Saviour’s death. See on this whole subject the learned astronomical investigation of Dr. Seyffarth, Chronologia Sacra, Leipzig, 1846, p130 ff. and p 281 ff. Seyffarth, who defends the æra Dionysiaca as correct, both as to the year and day of Christ’s birth, puts this eclipse on the 19 th of March, a. d33, and regards it both as a natural and as a supernatural phenomenon. He infers this even from Phlegon’s testimony, who says that this eclipse surpassed all others ever seen (μεγίστη τῶν ἐγνωσμένων πρότερον), and yet there can be no greater natural eclipse of the sun than a total eclipse, such as is not unfrequently witnessed in every generation. But the majority of orthodox commentators regard it as a purely supernatural event on account of the time of the passover in the full moon, when the sun cannot be obscured by the moon. So also Meyer, Stier, Alford, Wordsworth, who calls it a σκότυς θεοποίητον, Andrews, and Nast. At all events, the unanimous testimony of all the synoptical Gospels must silence all question as to the universal belief of this darkness as a fact. The omission of it in John’s Gospel is of no more weight than the numerous other instances of such omission. The darkness was designed to exhibit the amazement of nature and of the God of nature at the wickedness of the crucifixion of Him who is the light of the world and the sun of righteousness.—P. S.]

FN#70 - This passage is entirely mistranslated in the Edinb. edition, so as to give the very opposite sense. I compared Meyer’s fourth edition, and gave his view more fully than Dr. Lange who quotes from the third edition. Alford confines the expression to that part of the globe over which it was day, but sees no strong objection to any limitation, provided the fact itself, as happening at Jerusalem, is distinctly recognized.—P. S.]

FN#71 - Wordsworth infers from this an argument for the use of vernacular Scriptures.—P. S.]

FN#72 - So Alford: “intended mockery, as οῦ̔τος clearly indicates.” Also Alexander, Ellicott, Andrews, Owen, Crosby, Stier, Nast, etc.—P. S.]

FN#73 - Not: Matthew 27:6, as the Edinb. edition has it, slavishly following the German here and in similar quotations, without referring to the passage, and ignorant of the difference of the German and English Bibles in numbering the verses of Psalm, which arises from a different view of the inscription in its relation to the Psalm. The passage here meant is: “Into thy hand I commit my spirit: thou hast redeemed, me, O Lord God of truth.” These were the dying words of Luther and of other great men. The τετέλεσται of John was said before the words recorded by Luke: Father, into Thy hands I commend My spirit, and the latter are implied in the παρέδωκεν τὸ πνεῦμα with which John relates the death of the Saviour immediately after the exclamation: It is finished! The connection must be plain to every one, and there is no excuse for Meyer’s arbitrary assumption of the unhistorical character of the dying exclamation in Luke.—P. S.]

FN#74 - Origen likewise referred it to the outer veil, and thought that the inner veil would not be taken away till that which is perfect is come, 1 Corinthians 13:10.—P. S.]

FN#75 - The Edinb. edition has just the reverse: “the death of the world.”—P. S.]

FN#76 - The fathers, however, correctly assumed that the dead did not actually arise till after the resurrection of Christ. Jerome in loc.: “Non antea resurrexerunt, guam Dominus resurgeret, ut esset primogenitus resurrectionis ex mortuis.”—P. S.]

FN#77 - The Edinb. translation substitutes for culmination, the doubtful issue, for decision (Entscheidung), dissolution, and for cry of triumph (der Siegesschrei, viz.: It is finished!), the death-cry!—P. S.]

FN#78 - In German an untranslatable rhyme: Christi Geduld, der Menschen Schuld, Gottes Huld.—P. S.]

FN#79 - The Edinb. edition has here: Mary, mistaking the German Moria for Maria, and this in spite of the connection, which makes it sufficiently plain that Mount Moriah is intended, as the seat of the temple, which represents the types and shadows of the Jewish worship.—P. S.]

FN#80 - The Edinb. edition has instead: the green ear! How the German: grüne Aue, could be thus mistaken, especially in connection with the quotation of Psalm 23:2, I am unable to explain. Is it possible that the translator mistook Aue for Aehre!—P. S.]

Verses 57-66

ELEVENTH SECTION

THE BURIAL. THE SEPULCHRE SEALED

Matthew 27:57-66

( Mark 15:42-47; Luke 23:50-56.)

57When the even [evening] was come, there came a rich man of Arimathea, named Joseph, who also himself was Jesus’ disciple [who had become a disciple of Jesus]:^[FN81] 58He went to Pilate, and begged [asked for] the body of Jesus. Then Pilate commandedthe body^[FN82] to be delivered 59 And when Joseph had taken the body, he^[FN83] wrapped itin a clean linen cloth, 60And laid it in his own new tomb, which he had hewn out in the rock: and he rolled a great stone to the door of the sepulchre [tomb],^[FN84] and departed 61 And there was Mary magdalene,^[FN85] and the^[FN86] other Mary, sitting over against the sepulchre.

62Now the next day [But on the morrow, τͅῆ δὲ ἐπαύριον], that followed the day of the preparation [παρασκευή, Friday],^[FN87] the chief priests and Pharisees came together untoPilate, 63Saying, Sirach, we remember that that deceiver said, while he was yet alive, Afterthree days I will rise again 64 Command therefore that the sepulchre be made sure until the third day, lest his disciples come by night,^[FN88] and steal him away, and say unto the people, He is risen from the dead: so the last error [deceit] shall [will] be worse than 65 the first. Pilate said^[FN89] unto them, Ye have [Ye shall have] a watch: go your way, make it as sure [secure] as ye can [know how, ὡς οἴδατε].^[FN90] 66So they went, and made the sepulchre sure [secure], sealing the stone, and setting a watch [together with the watch, μετὰ τῆς κουστωδίας].^[FN91]