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

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

The great judgment in its comprehensive importance: 1. A judgment upon the whole world; 2. a whole world of judgment (all judgments summed up in one). Or: 1. The Judge of the world (the Son of Prayer of Manasseh, whom the world judged, now in His glory); 2. the judged; 3. the separation, and the twofold sentence; 4. the end and issue of all.—The judgment of the world as the last great Revelation 1. Of the great Judges 2. of the great judgment; 3. of the great redemption.—The last judgment, the great epiphany, Titus 2:13; and the end of the world.—Christ at that day will seal and finish His Pastoral office.—The Son of Man one with the Judge of the world: 1. The Son of Man is Judge of all; or, the divinity of the destiny of man.^[FN63] 2. The Judge of all is the Son of Man; or, the humanity of the divine judgment.—Christ is all in all in the judgment: 1. He is the Judges 2. He is the Law, according to which judgment is pronounced (whether He was or was not regarded in His brethren); 3. He is Himself the Retribution:—(a) the recompense of the good; (b) the loss of the wicked.—Individuality reigns throughout the judgment: 1. All the fundamental laws of holy life appear in the person of Christ; 2. the spirit and work of men are manifest in personal characteristics; 3. blessedness and perdition are seen in the fellowship of persons.—Christ, once crucified, will speak as the King in the judgment.—The distinctions in the divine decrees of salvation and perdition: 1. Blessedness was prepared for men from the foundation of the world; 2. condemnation (the portion of the wicked with the devil and his angels) not till the end of the world.—Christ will at that day judge the divinity of our faith by its Christlike humanity, its sacred mercy—according to its fruits.—Men’s good or evil treatment of the suffering Christ in suffering humanity: 1. As the Christ in need: (a) hungry, and fed or not fed; (b) thirsty, and given to drink or not; (c) a stranger, and taken in or not2. As the Christ in suffering: (a) naked (poor), and clothed or not; (b) sick^[FN64] (wretched), and visited or not; (c) in prison (banished, persecuted, condemned), and receiving fellowship or not.—Have ye taken in Christ, though in strange garments? In the strange garments: 1. Of nationality; 2. of religion; 3. of confession (or denomination); 4. of scholastic terminology.^[FN65]—The marks of good works which Christ will recognise: 1. The works of faith, which have, consciously or unconsciously, regarded Him in the brethren; 2. true works of faith, which have beheld Christ in men, and treated them accordingly, in actions (and not in dogmas only); 3. works resting on the ground of a true humility, which, wrought by the Spirit, knows not what good it has wrought.—Christ, as the Judges, will bring to light the most hidden roots of life, and principles of judgment: the humility of the godly, and the self-righteousness of the ungodly.—The great redemption and the great judgment are the consummation and complement of each other.—The great contrast in the issue of men’s ways and purposes: the kingdom of the Father, and the fire of Satan—And these shall go away: let us never forget the terrible end.

Starke:— Mark, ye scoffers, Christ will surely come to judgment; 2 Peter 3:4.—Quesnel: The sinner may do his best now to fly from the presence of God; but he must finally make his appearance before His judgment-seat, Romans 14:10.—Canstein: That the faithful will themselves stand before the tribunal, is by no means a contradiction to their high prerogative of judging the world as spiritual kings, and of being as it were assessors of the Judges, 1 Corinthians 6:2.—Greg. Nazianz.: Nulla re inter omnes ita colitur Deus ut misericordiâ.—Hedinger: Good works shall be compensated, as if they had been done to Christ.—Canstein: Believers remain humble, even in their glorification.—The best good works are those which are done in hearty simphcity, and almost unthought of.—The blessed lose none of their honor through their humility; God glories in them all the more.—How great the love of Jesus, thus to call the faithful His own brethren!—If he must go into eternal fire to whom Christ says, “I was naked, etc,” what place shall receive him to whom He will have to say, “I was clothed, and ye stripped Me?” Augustine.—Neglect of doing good is a grievous sin, James 4:17.—Luther: That the ungodly will not confess to their neglect of doing good, only reveals the darkness and wretchedness of their minds, which made them refuse to know, in the time of grace, either Christ or His members; the thought they had concerning Christ in their lifetime will be most strongly declared in the judgment.—No excuse will stand in the day of judgment.—Canstein: The eternal rebellion of the lost against God’s holy will, will be great part of their eternal woe.—Wretched prince of darkness! who cannot defend himself and his servants from the pains of hell.

Gerlach:—Two things must be specially marked in the proceedings of the judgment: the division of all men into two parts or fellowships, and that for eternity; and then the tokens which will be found on those whom the Lord will accept—self-forgetting, humble, brotherly love.—Faith alone justifies and saves ( [The curse, however, at the end of the world, does not merely signify condemnableness, but consummate ripeness for condemnation.]—Not “Ye cursed of My Father:” their own Acts, and not the Father, brought their curse upon them.—The everlasting fire which was prepared (not for you, but) for the devil.—Chrysostom: I prepared for you the kingdom, the fire for the devil and his angels; ye have plunged into this fire, and it is now yours.—Indeed, the fire was not from eternity prepared for the devil; but the difference Isaiah, that men were redeemed.—The second death.

Lisco:—The inseparable connection between love to Christ and love to the brethren.—Departure from Jesus, the doom of the unloving.—Their mind was like the devil’s; hence they share his doom.

Heubner:—Remember always the hymn: Dies iræ, dies illa.^[FN66]—Ask often of thy soul, where will the Lord finally place thee.—The kingdom is the kingdom of glory, into which the kingdom of grace has changed.—Prepared: the blessedness of the good, the end of creation.—Leo Magn.: The passion of Christ if continued to the end of the world.—Luther: It is a lie to say that thou wouldst have done much good to Christ, if thou art not doing it to these, the wretched.—Unchristian, evil tendencies invariably end in communion with Satan.

Theremin:—Of blessedness and condemnation.—Niemann:—The glory of Christ in the judgment: He will be glorious: 1. In His power; 2. in His omniscience; 3. in His righteousness; 4. in His grace.—Kniewel:^[FN67] How firm faith in the coming of Christ to judgment sanctifies and glorifies earthly life. It produces in us: 1. A holy fear of God; 2. genuine love; 3. sound hope.—Dräseke:—The great day of the kingdom a glorious day, an all-decisive day, an inevitable day, and a day profoundly mysterious.—The same:—The threefold judgment—in the heart, in the history of the world, in the great day.—Reinhard:—That we may not fear the day of judgment, we must have our hearts filled with the spirit of true Christian love to man.—Bachmann:—The last judgment in its glory.—Natorp:—God will reward every one according to his works.

[W. Burkitt (condensed): The general judgment: 1. The Person judging, the Son of Man; 2. the persons judged, good and bad; the one called sheep, for their innocency and meekness; the other goats, for their unruliness and uncleanness; 3. the manner of His coming to judgment most august and glorious in His person and attendance; 4. the work of the Judge: (a) He will gather all nations, persons of all nations, sects, classes, and conditions of man; (b) He will divide them, as a shepherd his sheep,—a final separation of the godly and the wicked; (c) He will pronounce the sentence, of absolution of the righteous, and condemnation of the wicked; 5. the final issue.—Christ personal is not the object of our pity and charity, but Christ mystical is exposed to want and necessity.—Christ keeps a faithful record of all our acts of pious charity, when we have forgotten them.—Christ calls His poorest members: My brethren.—God is the author and procurer of man’s happiness (“ye blessed of My Father…the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world,” Matthew 25:34); but man only is the author of his own misery (“ye cursed,…for the devil,” etc, Matthew 25:41).—Sins of omission are damning as well as sins of commission ( Matthew 25:42-45).—The one sin of unmercifulness is enough to damn a person, because it deprives him of the grace of the gospel.—If the uncharitable shall be damned, where shall the cruel appear?—Matthew Henry (condensed):—The general judgment: 1. The appearance of the Judge in the bright cloud of glory and with the myriads of angels as His attendants and ministers; 2. the appearing of all the children of men before Him; 3. the separation; 4. the process of judgment: (a) the glory conferred upon the righteous: they are called blessed and admitted into the kingdom, on account of their works of charity done in faith and humility, the grace of God enabling them thereto; (b) the condemnation of the wicked: Depart from Me, ye cursed, etc.—every word has terror in it, like that of the trumpet on Mount Sinai, waxing louder and louder, every accent more and more doleful. The reason of this sentence: omission of works of charity5. Execution of the sentence. Thus life and death, good and evil, the blessing and the curse, are set before us, that we may choose our way.—(Dr. Thomas Scott in loc. makes excellent practical remarks, but not in the form of hints or short heads.)—D. Brown: Heaven and hell are suspended upon the treatment of Christ and of those mysterious ministrations to the Lord of glory as disguised in the person of His followers.—True love of Christ goes in search of Him, hastening to embrace and to cherish Him, as He wanders through this bleak and cheerless world in His persecuted cause and needy people.—To do nothing for Christ is a sufficient cause for condemnation.—(I have examined also the Fathers on this section and read through the Catena Aurea of Thomas Aquinas, but find them far less rich than I expected, and considerably inferior to the practical comments of Protestant expounders above quoted. Some of their views are inserted in the Exeg. Notes. Augustine dwells at length on Matthew 25:46 to refute Origen’s view of a final salvation of all, even the devil and his angels, and tries to solve the difficulty that the wicked can be capable of suffering bodily and spiritual pain, and yet be incapable of death. Comp. De civit. Dei, Matthew 21:3.)—P. S.]

Footnotes:

FN#46 - Matthew 25:31.—The adjective ἅγιοι of the text. rec. is wanting in Codd. B, D, L, [also in Cod Sinait.], many versions [including the Vulg, which reads simply: omnes angeli], and fathers, and seems to be a later interpolation.

FN#47 - Matthew 25:35—[Comp. the translation of the English Version in Matthew 14:16, where the same [phrase is rendered: give ye them to eat.—P. S.]

FN#48 - Matthew 25:40.—Των αδελφῶν μου, although omitted by Cod. B, is well established by the majority of witnesses.

FN#49 - Matthew 25:41.—[Cod. Sinait. reads ὑπαγετε for πορεύεσθε.—P. S.]

FN#50 - Matthew 25:43.—[Cod. Sinait. omits the words: γυμνὸς καὶ οὑ περιεβάλετέ με. But they are well supported by the best authorities and retained in all the critical editions.—P. S.]

FN#51 - Matthew 25:46.—[As the Greek uses αὶώνιον before ζωήν as well as κόλασιν, it should be rendered by the same word (either eternal or ererlasting) in both clauses. Comp the Lat Vulg.: in supplicium œternum…in vitam œternam; all the German Versions (ewig); Wiclif: everlastynge turmente…everlastynge liif; the Rheims Version: punishment everlasting, life everlasting. Tyndale introduced the change: everlastinge payne…lyfe etern all, which was retained in the subsequent Protestant Versions except the word pain, which King James revisers gave up for punishment I would prefer, however, in both cases eternal to everlasting, and translate: into eternal punishment…into eternal life. For everlasting refers to extensire infinitude or endless durat o; eternal expresses the intensive infinitude, and this dynamic conception, which implies much more than mere duration or existence in time, is the prevaili g idea here, without, however, excluding the other. But in any case the passage is one of the very strongest against Universalism, and the αποκατάστασις των παντων. Comp. also Dr. Lange’s Exeg. Notes.—P. S.]

FN#52 - So also Stier and Alford, who understand πάντα τὰ ἔθνη to mean all the nations of the world as distinguished from the ἐκλεκτοί, who were already gathered to Christ at the first resurrection and beginning of His mill nnial kingdom, and who will take part in the final judgment ( 1 Corinthians 6:2).—P. S.]

FN#53 - In German: geistliche Anmassungen. The Edinb. trsl has dignities!—P. S.]

FN#54 - So also Hilary and Chrysostom: “Sheep are profitable by their woo, their milk, their offspring. Not so goats: they represent unfruitfulness of life.” Wordsworth adopts this view and adds with Euthymius and Grotius the δυσωδια, in opposition to the sweet and fragrant sacrifice of holy and charitable deeds.”—P. S.]

FN#55 - Similarly Origen, Theophylact, and Maldonatus, who explains: Boni oves appellantur quia mites sunt, mali autem hirci quia asperi et per prœrupta ascendentes, idest, non acta et plana incidentes via. Nast combines un-cleanness and stubbornness as the two points of comparison of the bad with the goats, but mentions only meekness on the part of the sheep.—P. S.]

FN#56 - Bengel derives from the word ὑμῖν, prepared for you, an argument against the scholastic notion that men were created or elected to fill up the number of fallen angels: Ergo homines electi non sunt suffecti in locum angelorum, qui peccarunt.—P. S.]

FN#57 - Similar observations are made by Alford and Wordsworth: “In Matthew 25:34,” says the latter, “Christ describes the joys of heaven as a κληρονομία prepared for men by God even from the beginning. But the pains of hell are not described as prepared for men, but for the devil and his angels. God designs eternal happiness for men; they incur eternal misery by their own acts.”—The significance of the omissions and change in the two cases was early observed even by Origen and Chrysostom, and is urged also by Maldonatus, Olshausen, Stier, Nast, and other.—Origen: “He says not now: Ye cursed of My Father, because of all blessing the Father is the author, but each man is the origin of his own curse when he does the things that deserve the curse.”—Maldonatus: “Non dixit: ‘Maledicti Patris mei’, sicut justis dixerat: ‘Venite, benedicti Patrismei,’ quia Deus non maledictionis, sed benedictionis, non pœnœ, sed prœmii auctor fuit; non quod non etiam pœna auctor fuerit, sed quod prœmia libenter et ex animi propensione, pœnam invitus quodammodo, ut justitœ suœ satisfaceret, prœparaverit.”—P. S.]

FN#58 - So also Dante in the famous inscription on the gate of hell; see Inferno, Canto iii. Stier observes, that even for the devil, who was created an angel, hell was no more fore-ordained than his sin, although it was prepared for him as soon as he became a devil.—P. S.]

FN#59 - The Edinb. trsl. renders Selbstgerechtigkeit (=ἡ ἐμή, or ἡ ἰδία δικαιοσύνη, or δικαιοσύνη τοῦ νόμου, ἐκ νόμου, δικ. ἐξ ἔργων) here and above ad Matthew 25:37 by self-justification, confounding the word with Selbstrechtfertigung (=δικαίωσις).—P. S.]

FN#60 - Alford: “Observe, the same epithet is used for κόλασις and ζωή—which are here contraries—for the ζωή here spoken of is not bare existence, which would have annihilation for its opposite; but blessedness and reward, to which punishment and misery are antagonist terms.”—Wordsworth in loc.: “The word αἰών corresponds to the Hebrew עדֹלָם, which appears to be derived from the unused root עָלַם, to conceal; so that the radical idea in αἰών, as used in Holy Scripture, is indefinite time; and thus the word comes to be fitly applied to this world, of which we do not know the duration; and also to the world to come, of which no end is visible, because that world is eternal. This consideration may perhaps check speculations concerning the duration of future punishments. (?)” But this etymology of עדֹלִם is somewhat doubtful, and αἰών has nothing to do with hiding and concealing, but comes probably from ἄω, ἄημι, to breathe, to blow; hence life, generation, age (like the Latin œvum); then indefinitely for endless duration, eternity.—P. S.]

FN#61 - Not a parable proper. Comp. M. Henry: “We have here a description of the process of the last judgment in the great day. There are some passages in it that are parabolical, as the separating between the sheep and the goats, and the dialogues between the judge and the persons judged; but there is no thread of similitude carried through the discourse, and, therefore, it is rather to be called a draught or delineation of the final judgment than a parable; it Isaiah, as it were, the explanation of the former parables.”—P. S.]

FN#62 - Not: the grand and awful revelation (Edinb. trsl.). In German: die einfache, wenn auch feierliche Enthüllung.]

FN#63 - Not: “of His (Christ’s) human decrees,” as the Edinb. trsl. renders “die Göttlichkeit der (not: Seiner) menschlichen Bestimmung” (i.e, destiny, end).—P. S.]

FN#64 - For which the Edinb. trsl. reads rich,—evidently a typographical error.]

FN#65 - Der religiösen Schulsprache, the language of different theological schools, but not “denominational language” (as the Edinb. trsl. has it): for this would be identical with the preceding confession, which the Germans use it the same sense in which we use denomination. Dr Lange refers to theoretical theological differences as distinct from practical religious differences. Many disputes in the Christian Church are mere logomachies, and disappear, if they are divested of their learning, and the parties are brought face to face and heart to heart in prayer or good works as Christian brethren—P. S.]

FN#66 - This awfully sublime hymn of an humble mediæval monk, Thomas a Crlano (about1250), is the most perfect specimen of Latin church poetry, and sounds like the trumpet of the final judgment which will rouse the dead from their sleep of centuries. Each word contains a distinct sound and sentiment; the ear and the heart are carried on step by step with irresistible force, and skeptical reason itself must bow before the general judgment as an awful, impending reality which will confront at last every individual. The Dies [illegible] is introduced with great effect in Goethe’s Foust. There are over70 German, and many English translations (by Walter Scott, Trench, Davidson, Coles, who alone furnished18. etc) of this giant hymn, as it is called, but none comes up fully to the majestic force and overpowering music of the original. It has given rise also to some of the best judgment hymns in modern languages, and to famous musical compositions of Palestrina, Pergolese, Haydn, Cherubini. Weber, and Mozart—P. S.]

FN#67 - A preacher in Danzig, not to be confounded (as it done in the Edinb. trsl.) with Kuinoel, the commentator.—P. S.]

26 Chapter 26
Introduction

PART SIXTH

Jesus in the Consummation of His High-Priesthood; or, the History of the Passion

Matthew 26, 27

( Mark 14, 15; Luke 22, 23; John 12-19)

The prophetic office of Jesus was historically finished in His eschatological discourses: in the history of His sufferings, His high-priestly office, as to its historical aspect, was completed. It was necessary, in the very nature of the case, that the idea of the high-priestly sufferings should be prominent in all the Evangelists; but we find it made specially prominent in the account of Matthew. Thus he lays stress upon the fact, that the fallen priesthood in Israel determined to put Him to death ( Matthew 26:3, etc); and he most sharply of all delineates the traitor who delivered Him up. Matthew alone mentions the thirty pieces of silver, as the price of Him who was sold. In Matthew’s account of the Supper, and in his alone, it is said that the sacrifice of Jesus availed for His people, εις ά̓φεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν ( Matthew 26:28). The struggle in Gethsemane is described with particular minuteness; and the threefold repetition of the same prayer is expressly recorded. The reproof of Simon Peter when he drew his sword, the declaration that the twelve legions of angels might be summoned to help—that is the exhibition of our Lord’s voluntary submission at that time—occur in Matthew, and scarcely in any other. (Comp. John 17:11.) The suicide of Judas, and the history of the field of blood, are peculiar to Matthew ( Matthew 27:8-10): as also, Pilate’s wife’s dream ( Matthew 26:19), Pilate’s washing of his hands, the people’s invocation of the curse on themselves ( Matthew 26:24-25), and specially the blasphemy against Christ on the cross ( Matthew 26:43). The rending of the vail of the temple is recorded chiefly by Mark also; but the specific meaning of this event is unfolded only by Matthew ( Matthew 26:51-53). So also is the very important circumstance of the sealing and watch set by the Sanhedrin on the sepulchre. Thus in his Gospel Christ appears from the beginning as sacrificed, and in purpose destroyed by the corrupt high-priesthood; and the signs of propitiation in His death are made sharply prominent. On the other hand, many dramatic traits of the synoptical Gospels are given very briefly by Matthew. Like Mark and Luke, he omits the washing of the feet ( John 13:1 sqq.), and records instead the institution of the Supper. He passes over the contention of the disciples, Luke 22:24; and the further expansion of the warning to Peter, John 13:33; Luke 22:31. Like them also, he omits the farewell discourses in John. (Mark alone gives the account of the young man who fled, Mark 14:51.) Matthew, with the other Synoptists, says nothing of the examination before Annas, John 18:13, or of the details of the examination before Pilate, John 18:29. He omits also the sending to Herod, which Luke records, Matthew 23:7; the scourging, John 19:1; the transaction between Pilate and the Council concerning the title, “King of the Jews,” John 19:19; the Saviour’s words to the weeping women, Luke 23:27; His last saying to His mother, John 19:25; and the circumstances of John 19:31, etc.

Of all the words from the cross, Matthew records only the exclamation, “My God, My God!” and he alone makes the observation, that Jesus departed with a loud cry. In these, as in similar traits, Mark approaches him most nearly; but it is very plain that in Matthew the thought of the high-priestly suffering is most strongly impressed upon the whole narrative.

As it respects the chronology, the departure of Jesus from the temple, on Tuesday evening, after His great condemning discourse, had introduced the final crisis. We have seen how much more probable it is that Jesus announced on Wednesday to His disciples, that after two days He should be crucified, than that He announced it late on Tuesday evening. This refers the session of the Council, Matthew 26:3, to Wednesday (not to Tuesday night, Leben Jesu, ii3, p1307). From this fixed date the narrative goes back to the anointing in Bethany, which took place some days before—that Isaiah, on the evening of the Saturday before Palm Sunday. Then follows the preparation of the Passover on the first day of unleavened bread—that Isaiah, on the 14 th Nisan, the morning of Thursday, Matthew 26:17. On the evening of the 14 th Nisan, the beginning of the 15 th, comes the Passover itself.

The question here arises, whether there is any difference between the Synoptists and John in the account of the Passover.^[FN1] As the Synoptists agree in the statement that Jesus ate the Passover at the legal time with His disciples, it is John who gives rise to a seeming difference; and the discussion of the question might therefore be deferred. It is better, however, to attempt a brief settlement at once.

On the first day of unleavened bread,—that Isaiah, on the 14 th Nisan,—the paschal feast was, according to Matthew, made ready. On that day the leavened bread was to be removed. On the evening of that day, before six o’clock, and thus at the point of transition from the 14 th Nisan to the 15 th, the lega Passover was introduced by the feet-washing. This explains the representation of John. (1) John 13:1-4 : “Before the feast of the Passover,…Jesus riseth from supper, and layeth aside His garments ” (that Isaiah, to perform the washing). The feast itself began about six o’clock; and it would be very strange if the expression, “before the feast,” must be made to mean “a day before.” It would be much nearer to say, “some minutes before;”^[FN2] but the real meaning Isaiah, “an indefinite time previous.” (2) John 13:27 : Jesus said to Judas, “What thou doest, do quickly;” and some present thought that he was commanded to go at once, before the opening of the feast, and buy what provisions were necessary for it. But they could not possibly have entertained such a thought, if the whole of the next day had been open to them for the purpose; although it was a very natural one, if the time allowed for secular purposes was fast drawing to a close.^[FN3] (3) John, Matthew 18:28, narrates that the Jews, on the morning of the crucifixion, might not enter with Jesus into the Prætorium, “lest they should be defiled, but that they might eat the Passover ” (χλλ̓ ἴνα φάγασι τὸ πάοχα). Since the defilement occasioned by entering a Gentile house lasted only one day, they might very well have gone into the Prætorium, and yet eat the Passover after six o’clock; for the defilement would cease at six o’clock in the evening.^[FN4] But, if they had eaten the Passover the evening before, they could not have entered the hall on the morning of the 15 th Nisan, lest they should desecrate the paschal feast. John uses here the common and ordinary expression, in the brief form, φαγεῖν^[FN5] τὸ πάσχα Wieseler thinks πάσχα an unusual and peculiar form, and understands it of the Chagigah [feast-offering] on the 15 th Nisan; others refer it to the whole paschal feasts, Deuteronomy 16:2; 2 Chronicles 30:22 : “they did eat the paschal feast seven days, offering peace offerings;” but the peculiarity, we think, lies in the φαγεῖν, meaning the continuance of the paschal feast. Examples of such concise expressions are frequent enough, e.g, to eat fish for to fast; to celebrate Christmas (Weihnacht) for Christmas-day (Christtag), etc.^[FN6] (4) John 19:31; The Jews urged on the burial of the crucified, that the bodies might not hang upon the crosses on the Sabbath, the day of preparation. Wieseler: The day of preparation, πυρασκεμή, does not signify the preparation before the Passover, but before the first sabbath of the Passover. To the Jews, the Friday was the eve of the Sabbath, or day of preparation; and, if the Passover chanced to begin on a Friday, the next Saturday or Sabbath became a high day, the great day of the feast. “That Sabbath was a high day.” From this permanent παρασκευή for the Sabbath, John distinguishes a day of preparation for the feast generally, John 13:1 and Matthew 26:29.^[FN7]—Other reasons alleged in favor of the supposed difference of days are these: (1) Improbability of an execution on a feast day. Against this we have Rabb Akiba: Great transgressors were taken to Jerusalem, in order that they might be put to death at the feast, before the eyes of the people (according to Deuteronomy 17:12-13). Executions had a religious character. They were symbols of judgment, for warning and edification. Sad analogies are the Spanish auto da fés as popular religious festivals.^[FN8] (2) The women prepared their spices on the day of Jesus’ death. But we answer that on the mere feast days (not Sabbaths) spices might be prepared, and other things might be done: labor only was excluded ( Leviticus 23:7-8). (3) The Synoptists as well as John describe the day of Christ’s death as παρασκευή and προσθ́ββυτος. We answer that the second of these terms simply proves the day to have been Friday.—Thus all the evidences brought forward to support the theory of a difference in the days may be used on the opposite side.

In addition to this we must urge the following positive reasons in favor of our view: 1. It cannot be conceived that Jesus, led always by the Father through the path of legal ordinance, would celebrate the paschal feast a day before the time, and thereby voluntarily hasten His own death2. Pilate releases a prisoner to the Jews ἑν τῷ πάσχα John 18:39. 3. John, according to the testimony of the Quarto-decimans of the Easter controversy, kept the feast on the evening of the 14 th Nisan, and therefore at the same time with the Jews4. The argument used by the Fathers, Clemens and Hippolytus, against the Quartodecimans, that Jesus died on the legal day of the Passover, because He was the real Passover, may be made to support the claim for the 15 th Nisan (although there is an evident confusion among these fathers in the counting of the days, and too much stress laid on the fact that the paschal lamb was slain on the 14 th Nisan).^[FN9] If Jesus died on the 15 th Nisan, He died on the day of the legal Passover; for that day began at six o’clock of the 14 th Nisan. If, on the other hand, it was at three o’clock in the afternoon of 14 th Nisan that He died, it would have been one day before the legal paschal day, which did not begin till six o’clock. Neglect of the difference between the Jewish and the Roman (and our own) reckoning from midnight has tended much to confuse this question.

The chronological difference in the account of the Evangelists has been maintained by Bretschneider, Usteri, Theile, de Wette, Meyer, Lücke, Bleek, Ebrard, and many others, who decide the question, some in favor of the Synoptists, some in favor of John. On the other hand, the agreement of John with the other three has been established by Hengstenberg, Tholuck, Wieseler, and, temporarily, by Ebrard.^[FN10] Others, again, have striven to explain the Synoptists according to the supposed meaning of John; among the more recent writers Movers, Krafft, and Maier [of Freiburg, in his Commentar über das Evangelium des Johannes, p280 sqq.—not to be confounded with the Protestant Meyer so often quoted in this work]. The latter urges that, according to John, the meal of which the Lord partook fell upon the evening of the 13 th Nisan. The term ἑν πρώτῃ των ἀζύμων, in the Synoptists, is then explained by the custom of the Galileans; according to which the whole preparation day of the feast, the 14 th Nisan, had been already kept. “According to their custom, this day fell into the Passover season, and might as including the last part of the 13 th Nisan, when the leaven was removed, be described as πρώτη τῶιἀζύμων” Thus he explains Matthew as meaning that the meal, no proper Passover, took place on the evening of the 13 th Nisan. But this is untenable. For, 1. Maier himself acknowledges that Mark and Luke expressly describe the Lord’s meal as a Passover celebrated at the legal time; and it is highly improbable that Matthew would here place himself on the side of John, in opposition to Mark and Luke 2. The circumstance, that the Galileans removed the leaven earlier than the Jews—so soon as the morning of the 14 th Nisan, even the evening before—may be accounted for by the obligations of their journey. They came as travellers and guests to Jerusalem, and were therefore obliged to fix an earlier time for the beginning of the preparation. But it was not possible that they should begin the feast of unleavened bread a day earlier, because this would have been opposed to all Jewish ordinance, and because they must in that case, during that whole day, have avoided all social intercourse with the Jews3. Jesus is said to have anticipated the day, because He foresaw His own death. But Jesus also foresaw that the betrayal of Judas would be connected with the PassoMatthew26:4. It is plain that Matthew speaks of a legal Passover which could not be anticipated; for the disciples remind the Lord that the time of the Passover was at hand. Matthew does not say that the first day of the feast of unleavened bread was approaching, but that it was come.—On other artificial attempts at reconciliation, see Winer, Reallexicon, art. Pascha.

All the Evangelists plainly agree in recording that Christ rose again on a Sunday, that He lay during the preceding Sabbath in the sepulchre, and that He died on the Friday before this Sabbath. According to Wieseler (p386 sqq.), Jesus was crucified on the 15 th of Nisan of the year30 a. d, or 783 from the foundation of Rome; and that day was a Friday.

[I call attention here to a different view on the day of Christ’s death, not hitherto noticed by commentators, but worthy of a respectful examination. Dr. Gustav Seyffarth, formerly professor extraordinary in the university of Leipzig, now residing in New York, the author of a number of learned works on Egyptiology, Astronomy, and Chronology, and the propounder of a new theory of the Egyptian hieroglyphics (see his Grammatica Ægyptiaca; Theologische Schriften der alten Ægypter, etc.), deviates from the traditional view, and holds that Christ died on Thursday, the 14 th (not the 15 th) of Nisan (the 19 th of March), and lay full three days and three nights in the grave till Sunday morning. See his Chronologia Sacra, Leipzig, p8 sq. and p120 sqq. He thus solves the difficulty concerning the three days and three nights which the Saviour was to lay in the grave according to repeated statements, Matthew 12:40 (τρεῖς ἡμέρας καὶ τοεῖς νύκτας); 27:63 (μετὰ τρεῖς ἡμἑρας); John 2:19 (ἐν τρισὶν ἡμέραις); Revelation 11:9 (ἡμέρας τρεῖς). Dr. Seyffarth supports this view also by astronomical calculations of the eclipse of the sun at the death of our Saviour, into the details of which I cannot here follow him. In fact, he bases ancient chronology largely on astronomy. As to the year of Christ’s death, Dr. Seyffarth, considering the Æra Dionysiaca correct in the date of the year and the day of Christ’s birth, puts it the year33 post Christum natum, or787 Anno Urbis. Other dates of Christ’s death assigned by various writers are: A. U783 (Wieseler, Friedlieb, Tischendorf, Greswell, Ellicott, Lange, Andrews); 781 (Jarvis); 782 (Browne, Sepp, Clinton); 786 (Ebrard, Ewald).—P. S.]

The Meaning of the Sufferings and Death of Jesus.—Here is the sacred centre of history, the history of histories, the end and the summing up of all past time, the beginning and the summing up of all the new ages, the perfected judgment, and the perfected redemption. Therefore, also, it is a perfected revelation: it is the supreme revelation of Jesus and of the depths of His heart; of the deep things of the Godhead; of the divine Wisdom of Solomon, righteousness, and grace; of the depths of humanity, the most manifold characteristics of which are here laid bare in the contrast between the holy Son of Man and the sinful children of men; the depths of nature, living and suffering in fellowship with humanity; the deep things of the spiritual world, and the depths of Satan. As it is said in Isaiah 53, concerning the Redeemer: “Who shall declare His length of life?” so it may here be said: “Who shall declare the depths of His death?”

We can only hint here at the riches of the contrasts—revealing the fulness of the revelation of judgment and redemption—which the history of our Lord’s passion includes1. The contrast of the sufferings of Christ with His last eschatological predictions concerning His own future judicial majesty. Chrysostom: “At the fitting time He speaks now of His sufferings, when His future kingdom, with its rewards and punishments, was so present to His thoughts.” 2. The contrast of His passion with His past official work in life: suffering as the counterpart of action, passive obedience of active. Lisco; “The history of the Redeemer’s passion is related at large, and with peculiar preference, by the Evangelists. In His sufferings (as in His actions) the God-man reveals Himself in His dignity and glory But while the active virtues exhibit themselves in His whole life, the no less great virtues of patience, gentleness, longsuffering, and supreme submission to God, prominently express themselves in His sufferings. These were not so much the consequence of the cunning, malice, and power of His enemies, as His own free-will offering for the redemption of a sinful world: in this He manifested Himself as the innocent and patient Lamb of God, bearing and putting away the sins of the world in obedience to His heavenly Father. The suffering, dying, and victoriously rising Redeemer, amidst all the diversified concomitants of His passion, gives us a perfect image of the great conflict between the kingdoms of light and of darkness. Far from all passionless indifference, the Redeemer exhibited in His sufferings the tender emotions of sorrow and grief, and even of anguish and fear—thus becoming to us also a symbol of that endurance of suffering which is well-pleasing to God,” 3. The contrast of the perfected passion to the suffering course of His whole life4. The contrast between the great fulfilment, and the types and the predictions concerning the suffering Messiah ( Psalm 22; Isaiah 53). 5. The contrast with the ancient martyrs from the blood of Abel downward6. The contrast between the woes of Christ and the sorrows and pleasures of the old world7. The contrast of His passion with His original divine glory, and his final human glorification.—A new series of such antitheses is then opened in the contrast of the sufferings of the personal Christ with the sufferings of His people, with the contrast of death and resurrection, to the end of the world. And, on the other side, there are the contrasts of reconciliation: the reconciliation of God and Prayer of Manasseh, of heaven and earth, of this world and the next, of life and death, of the crown and the cross, of judgment and mercy. Heubner: “The history of the passion is the highest and holiest history; it is the turning-point in the history of the world, both in itself, and its design and effect.”

In the homiletical treatment of this event care should ever be taken not to forget the central-point, the Lord Himself, while contemplating the prominent figures surrounding Him. The suffering Redeemer Himself is always the essential object in every section;—the point of view from which to regard all the other persons, Judas, Peter, Pilate, and the rest, who must be seen in the light which He sheds upon them. Then, also, we should remember to regard these guilty and failing characters not with feelings of human excitement, and the rage of judicial revenge against Pilate and Judas (as in the Ash-Wednesday services of mediæval Catholicism), but in the spirit of conciliation which the atoning sacrifice before us suggests. And, lastly, the redeeming power of the victorious love of Christ should be supreme in our thoughts; from it we should derive our arguments and pleas.

Literature on the History of Christ’s Passion.^[FN11]—See full lists of works in Lilienthal: Bibl. Archivartus, 1745, p118 sqq.; Danz: Wörterbuch der theol. Literatur, p732, and Supplement, p80; Winer: Handbuch der theol Literatur, ii. p155, Supplement, p258; Heubner, p376.—We mention the following: Hugo Grotius: Christus Patiens, a Latin drama, 1616; Klopstock: Messias (heroic poem); Lavater: Pontius Pilatus; Rambach: Meditations on the Whole History of Christ’s Passion (German). Berlin, 1742; Rieger: Sermons on the Passion (German), Stuttgart, 1751; Callisen: The Last Days of our Lord (German), Nürnberg, 182; F. W. Krummacher: The Suffering Saviour, Bielefeld, 1854 [English translation, Boston, 1857]; J. Wichelhaus: A complete Commentary on the History of Christ’s Passion (German), Hale, 1853. [L. H. Friedlieb: Archæology of the History of the Passion, Bonn1843; W. Stroud: Physical Cause of the Death of Christ, London, 1847; the relevant sections in the Lives of Christ by Hase, Neander, Sepp, Lange, Lichtenstein, Ebbard. Ewald. Riggenbach, Baumgarten, Van Oosterzee, Kitto, Ellicott, Andrews. On the doctrinal aspect of the History of the Passion, compare also W. Magee (archbishop of Duslin, † 1831): Discourses and Dissertations on the Scriptural Doctrines of Atonement and Sacrifice, 1801and often (Works, London, 1842, vol. lst).—P. S.]

On the development of the Catholic celebration of the Passion of Christ during Lent and the. Holy Week to Good Friday, we refer to the archæological works of Augusti and Rheinwald [Bingham..Binteim]; a so to Fr. Strauss: The Evangelical Church-Year (German), p177, and Lisco: The Christian-Church Year (German), p19 etc.