CHAPTER XIX.

1 Then[683] Pilate therefore took Jesus, and scourged[684] _him_.

[683] Matt. 27:26, etc.; Mark 15:16, etc.

[684] Isa. 53:5.

2 And the soldiers platted a crown of thorns, and put _it_ on his head, and they put on him a purple robe,

3 And said, Hail, King of the Jews! and they smote him with their hands.

4 Pilate therefore went forth again, and saith unto them, Behold, I bring him forth to you, that ye may know that[685] I find no fault in him.

[685] verse 6; ch. 18:38.

5 Then came Jesus forth, wearing the crown of thorns, and the purple robe. And _Pilate_ saith unto them, Behold the man!

=1-5.= The scourging of Jesus is recounted by all the Evangelists except Luke, and the mockery more fully by Matthew than here. See notes on Matthew. Scourging was a common precursor of the death-sentence; here, however, it appears to have been proposed by Pilate as a compromise (Luke 23:16).--=And said, Hail, King of the Jews.= Some manuscripts insert the words _they came unto him_, and this reading is approved by Tischendorf and Alford. It indicates a mock reverential approach as to a crowned king, with obeisances and pretended homage.--=Behold the man.= Pilate’s own sympathies were awakened by the sight of this patient sufferer, and he made one more attempt to release him by appealing to the sympathies of the people. In this act the commentators see an unconscious symbolical teaching parallel to that of Caiaphas (John 11:51, 52); Jesus is _the_ man, the only perfect man, the ideal toward which all aspiration is to strive (Ephes. 4:13). The scene has been a famous one in art, and the picture of Christ thorn-crowned receives its customary title, _Ecce Homo_, from two Latin words meaning Behold the man.

6 When the chief priests therefore and officers saw him, they cried out, saying, Crucify _him_, crucify _him_. Pilate saith unto them, Take ye him, and crucify _him_: for I find no fault in him.

=6. When the chief priests, therefore, and attendants.= The original here signifies an officer answering to the modern constable or policeman.--=They cried out.= The priests mingled in and joined their voices with those of the crowd. The sight of blood, so far from appeasing, only whetted their revengeful appetite.--=Take ye him and crucify him.= This was not a sentence, but rather an endeavor to cast the responsibility of its execution upon the priesthood. Comp. Matt. 27:24; Luke 23:25. That they felt the reproach is indicated by their reply.

7 The Jews answered him, We[686] have a law, and by our law he ought to die, because[687] he made himself the Son of God.

[686] Lev. 24:16.

[687] ch. 5:18; 10:33.

=7. The Jews answered him, We have a law=, etc. Not because their previous accusation had failed, and they wished to present a new one (_Lange_); but because, the death-sentence being already pronounced and ratified by the act of scourging, they felt safe in disclosing their real animus. The object of their reply is to justify themselves to his rebuke.

8 When Pilate therefore heard that saying, he was the more afraid;

9 And went again into the judgment hall, and saith unto Jesus, Whence art thou? But[688] Jesus gave him no answer.

[688] Ps. 38:13; Isa. 53:7; Matt. 27:12, 14; Phil. 1:28.

=8, 9. He was the more afraid, * * * and saith unto Jesus, Whence art thou?= But Jesus gave him no answer. Pilate’s was not a superstitious fear, but a genuine awe produced by the personal presence of Jesus, the power of which was conspicuously manifested on other occasions in his life (Luke 4:30; 5:8; John 7:45, 46; 18:6). It was doubtless enhanced by the report of his wife’s dream (Matt. 27:19). His question, _Whence art thou?_ is to be interpreted by this awe; not _from what province_, for he knew this (Luke 23:6, 7), nor _of what parents_, for this was a matter of indifference. The question indicates that even skeptical Pilate vaguely felt that the prisoner before him--the King of a kingdom of truth--was no ordinary man. Christ’s silence was a bitter rebuke. Pilate was no longer an honest seeker after truth. Christ “kept silent, in fine, because he knew as well when to hold his peace as when to speak, and no word that he ever uttered was fuller of inspiration than that silence; no, not even does that lofty declaration to Pilate, ‘Yes, I am a King, and every true man is my subject,’ show a more regal dignity of mind. From every feature, from his whole person, it spoke--spoke of a world of power in him, power to rise above all personal considerations, and, under the most terrible circumstances, to find entire serenity in the perfect possession of himself.”--(_Furness._)

10 Then saith Pilate unto him, Speakest thou not unto me? knowest[689] thou not that I have power to crucify thee, and have power to release thee?

[689] Dan. 3:14, 15.

=10. Then said Pilate unto him.= His pride is piqued by the silence of the prisoner. He boasts of his power, and so seeks to extort an answer from the prisoner’s fears. Observe that _power_ he had, but right he had not. “This very boast was a self-conviction of injustice. No just judge has any such power as this to punish or to loose (see 2 Cor. 13:8), but only patiently to inquire and give sentence according to the truth.”--(_Alford._)

11 Jesus answered, Thou[690] couldest have no power _at all_ against me, except it were given thee from above:[691] therefore he[692] that delivered me unto thee hath the greater[693] sin.

[690] ch. 7:30; Luke 22:53.

[691] Ps. 39:9.

[692] ch. 18:3; Mark 14:44.

[693] Heb. 6:4-8; James 4:17.

=11.= The connection of Christ’s answer here is difficult. It appears to me to be as follows: All civil and political power comes from God (Rom. 13:1; comp. Ps. 75:6, 7; Dan. 2:21). Even on earth kings are recognized as the administrators of the divine will (Isa. 44:28; 45:1). Caiaphas and the priesthood, therefore, in delivering Jesus to Pilate, are endeavoring not only to accomplish a deed of injustice, but to induce a divinely appointed minister of God to prove false to the trust reposed in him. Therefore their sin is greater than his; they are the instigators, he the partially ignorant and unwilling instrument. Comp. Luke 12:47, 48. Stier observes that Pilate’s ignorance includes him in the Lord’s prayer, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do” (Luke 23:34). That most wonderful declaration of the O. T., “He knoweth our frame, he remembereth that we are dust” (Ps. 103:14), receives its most wonderful illustration in Christ’s compassion for the perplexed but guilty Pilate.

12 And from thenceforth Pilate sought to release him: but the Jews cried out, saying, If thou let this man go, thou art not Cæsar’s friend: whosoever[694] maketh himself a king, speaketh against Cæsar.

[694] Luke 23:2; Acts 17:7.

=12. From thenceforth.= Or rather, _on this account_. The original is capable of either rendering; but Pilate had already sought to release Jesus; he now made a new effort, moved thereto apparently in part by his awe for Christ, and in part by Christ’s expression of compassion for him.--=Thou art not Cæsar’s friend.= Of all the Cæsars, Tiberius was the most suspicious and exacting; and of all crimes, that of indifference to his interests was in his eyes the worst. In these words of the priesthood there is implied a threat of an accusation to Tiberius against Pilate if he release Jesus.

13 When[695] Pilate therefore heard that saying, he brought Jesus forth, and sat down in the judgment seat, in a place that is called the Pavement, but in the Hebrew, Gabbatha.

[695] Prov. 29:25; Acts 4:19.

=13. Upon the judgment-seat in a place called Pavement.= The judgment-seat was probably a small elevated platform, such as was used among the ancients, on which orators stood to address a concourse, generals to harangue their troops, or magistrates to hear causes. The accompanying illustration from a bas-relief represents Trajan sitting on such a judgment-seat to receive the submission of a Parthian king. The employment of a similar platform both by Pilate and by Florus is referred to by Josephus (_Wars of Jews_, Rom. II: 9, 3; 14, 8). The Pavement was probably a tessellated or mosaic square in front of the tower of Antonia, on which the judgment-seat or bema was placed.

[Illustration: ROMAN JUDGMENT-SEAT.]

14 And[696] it was the preparation of the passover, and about the sixth hour: and he saith unto the Jews, Behold your King!

[696] Matt. 27:62.

=14. It was the preparation of the passover.= That is, the preparation for the Passover Sabbath. The strictness of the Mosaic law respecting the Sabbath necessitated special preparations for it on the previous day, and in process of time the whole day prior came to be known as _the preparation_ (Mark 15:42). If we so understand the passage, there is nothing in it inconsistent with the fact indicated by the other Evangelists that the paschal supper was taken by Christ and his disciples, in common with the rest of the nation, on the evening preceding.--=About the sixth hour.= But according to Mark it was the _third hour_ (Mark 15:25); and this is sustained by the whole course of the transactions and the circumstances, as also by the statements of Matthew (27:45), Luke (23:44), and Mark (15:33), that the darkness commenced at the sixth hour, after Jesus had for some time hung upon the cross. Of this discrepancy many explanations have been proposed, but only two are worthy of any consideration. One that by an early error in transcription the sixth was substituted for the third hour here; the other that John here only indicates that the sixth hour was approaching, or, as Lange renders it, _it was going on towards the sixth hour_; that is, the third hour, which closed the preceding watch into which the day was divided, had already passed, and that Mark’s language simply implies that the third hour had already passed before the crucifixion. It is certain that the ancients did not fix the time with as great precision as we do, and that in particular, as Godet says, “the apostles did not count with the watch in their hands.”--=Behold your King.= The previous appeal (ver. 5) had been to the pity of the people; this was to their national pride.

15 But they cried out, Away with _him_, away with _him_, crucify him! Pilate saith unto them, Shall I crucify your King? The chief priests answered, We[697] have no king but Cæsar.

[697] Gen. 49:10.

16 Then[698] delivered he him therefore unto them to be crucified. And they took Jesus, and led _him_ away.

[698] Matt. 27:26, etc.; Mark 15:15, etc.; Luke 23:24, etc.

=15, 16. We have no king but Cæsar.= This was true. By this very act they disavowed allegiance to Jehovah as their King (1 Sam. 12:12). They were thus emphatically guilty themselves of the crime of blasphemy, for which they had condemned Jesus. Some of these very men subsequently perished in rebellion against Cæsar, thus by their death testifying to the hypocrisy of their pretended zeal. He who refuses Christ as his King subjects himself to the despotism of worldly authority.--=Then delivered he to them to be crucified.= Giving them a guard of soldiers to execute the decree. Thus Roman and Jew shared in both decreeing and executing the sentence.

* * * * *

ON THE CHARACTER OF PONTIUS PILATE.--Concerning Pilate’s life before he became procurator nothing is known, except that his name indicates a probability that he was a freedman, or the descendant of a freedman, connected with the Pontian house. He succeeded Valerius Gratus as procurator of Judea and Samaria, about the year 26 A. D., and he held the appointment for a period of ten years. Secular history shows him to have been unscrupulous in the exercise of his authority; and instances are recorded by Josephus of his contempt of the Jews. His behavior was equally tyrannical toward the Samaritans; and on their complaint to Vitellius, president or prefect of Syria, Pilate was ordered to go to Rome to answer for his conduct before the emperor. His deposition must have occurred in A. D. 36, most probably prior to the Passover. Before he arrived in Rome, however, Tiberius was dead. According to tradition, Pilate was banished by Caligula to Vienne, in Gaul; according to Eusebius, he died by his own hand.

Though in the oldest Christian creed his name is indissolubly linked with the crucifixion, in the phrase “suffered under Pontius Pilate,” and though he was directly responsible for it, since it could not have been consummated without his judicial approbation, yet that approbation was wrested from him by a mob, and he yielded only when further resistance would have hazarded his office, if not his life. The story of the trial of Christ before Pilate is the story of a conflict between a judge who appealed in vain to the moral sense of the priesthood, and a priesthood who appealed not in vain to the fears of the judge. First he scornfully bids the Jews try Jesus according to their own law, knowing that they cannot put their prisoner to death (ch. 18:31); then catches, in the clamor, the word “Galilee,” and endeavors to rid himself of responsibility by sending the prisoner to Herod (Luke 23:4-12); on the return of the prisoner to his custody, proposes to release him, as a customary act of good-will, to the populace (Matt. 27:19-23; Mark 15:8-14); orders the scourging, in an idle hope so to satisfy the clamor of the mob (Matt. 27:26-30; Mark 15:15-19; John 19:1-3); having appealed in vain to their pity, appeals, also in vain, to their patriotism (John 19:4-15); and finally pronounces sentence of death only under an implied threat of complaint to the jealous Tiberius Cæsar (John 19:12, 16). But it would be a mistake to suppose that in this pitiable conflict with a mob, which it was Pilate’s first duty to quell, he was influenced by considerations of either humanity or justice. The contempt which a Roman soldier would naturally feel for the Jewish priesthood was intensified into a bitter personal hate by the fact that their cunning had twice overmatched his strength--once when, immediately after his inauguration, they had compelled him to remove the hated Roman standards from the city of Jerusalem to the old-time Roman military headquarters at Cæsarea Philippi; once when they had secured orders from Tiberius Cæsar directing him to take down the Roman shields from the vicinity of the temple. The one sentiment which was strong in a Roman soldier was that of justice; to be compelled by a Jewish mob, instigated by the Jewish priesthood, to assume the judicial robes only to do flagrant injustice in them, and that in executing the Jewish will, angered him. He was a tool in the hands of an unscrupulous and despised hierarchy; knew it, and fought against the humiliation weakly, and therefore in vain. He was also powerfully affected by the personal bearing of Christ. “If there is any power in the human countenance, in the eye, in the voice, in the whole air and manner of a man, that power must have been manifested in Jesus in the very highest degree. * * * Not that he (Pilate) had the slightest insight into the lofty nature of that power. His very ignorance of it served, by creating a feeling of mystery, only to heighten the effect of it upon his mind.”--(_Furness._) And this effect was still further increased by the dream of his wife; for skepticism and superstition are twins, and the skeptical Pilate was not above the universal superstitions of his times. All these elements made Pilate angry with himself and with the hierarchy, but they did not serve in lieu of a noble resolution, which alone could have enabled him to resist the threatening danger of an emeute. So he dallied, argued, appealed, yielded. The crime of Pontius Pilate was the crime of moral cowardice. It was more appalling in its results, but it was not different in its nature, from the many manifestations of that crime which we all often witness, and which most of us sometimes have experienced.

* * * * *

Ch. 19:17-42. DEATH AND BURIAL OF JESUS.--A FALSE JUDGE WRITES A TRUE EPITAPH (19).--A WEAK JUDGE PROVES HIMSELF OBSTINATE (22).--THE INHUMANITY OF MAN (24).--THE SYMPATHY OF CHRIST ILLUSTRATED (27).--THE FULFILLMENT OF ALL SCRIPTURE (28).--REDEMPTION A FINISHED WORK (30).--THE HYPOCRISY OF CEREMONIALISM (31).--THE NATURE, MEANING, AND CERTAINTY OF CHRIST’S DEATH (34, 35).--THE POWER OF THAT DEATH TO MAKE COWARDS COURAGEOUS (38, 39).--THE SEPULCHRE IN THE GARDEN; THE TOMB AMID FLOWERS (41, 42).

The accounts of all Evangelists should be compared. For chronological harmony and for full notes on what is common to them all, see Matt. 27:32-56. Several incidents are peculiar to Luke; some to John. The latter gives more fully the division of Christ’s garments among the soldiers (verses 23, 24); alone speaks of Christ’s parting words to his mother (verses 25-27), and of the piercing of his side (ver. 34).

17 And he bearing his cross went[699] forth into a place called _the place_ of a skull, which is called in the Hebrew, Golgotha:

[699] Numb. 15:36; Heb. 13:12.

18 Where they crucified him, and two other with him, on either side one, and Jesus in the midst.

=17, 18.= The cross was usually borne by the condemned. In this case it was transferred from Christ to Simon the Cyrene. See Matt. 27:32, note. The Hebrew word Golgotha is the same as the Latin word Calvary (_Calvaria_), and means _a skull_. The location is uncertain. For statement of different hypotheses and picture of most probable site, see Matt. 27:33, note.--The two others crucified with Christ were brigands, one of whom joined in the taunts of the multitude; the other rebuked his companion, and sought and obtained the blessing of the dying Redeemer. See Luke 23:39-43, notes.

19 And[700] Pilate wrote a title, and put _it_ on the cross. And the writing was, JESUS OF NAZARETH THE KING OF THE JEWS.

[700] Matt. 27:37; Mark 15:26; Luke 23:38.

20 This title then read many of the Jews: for the place where Jesus was crucified was nigh to the city: and it was written in Hebrew, _and_ Greek, _and_ Latin.

21 Then said the chief priests of the Jews to Pilate, Write not, The King of the Jews; but that he said, I am King of the Jews.

22 Pilate answered, What I have written I have written.

=19-22. And Pilate wrote a title.= It was customary to bear before the condemned an inscription which designated his crime; this was subsequently attached to the cross, as a warning against similar offences.--The inscription in this case was written in the three languages of the time--that of the court (Latin), that of the Gentile population (Greek), and that of the Jews (Hebrew or Aramaic).--It really affixed a stigma rather upon the Jews than upon Jesus. Hence their attempt to have it altered, and Pilate’s refusal. The Jews were insulting Jesus; Pilate took a petty revenge upon them for their victory over him by insulting them. The inscription is reported by the four Evangelists, in all of them substantially, in none of them verbally, the same. Thus:

This is Jesus, the King of the Jews.--(_Matthew._) The King of the Jews.--(_Mark._) This is the King of the Jews.--(_Luke._) Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews.--(_John._)

Apparently there were three inscriptions, in the three different languages; some commentators suppose that they differed slightly, and that the variations in the language of the inscription indicate the variations in the original. See this ingeniously argued in Townsend’s N. T. But the better opinion is that the inscription was the same in the three languages, and that the verbal differences are such as we might expect from individual narrators, who, in minor details, were left to their own recollection. So Robinson, Alford, Greenleaf, etc. Analogous verbal differences are to be constantly met with in the Evangelists: Matt. 3:11; Mark 1:7; Luke 3:16; John 1:27--Matt. 9:11; Mark 2:16; Luke 5:30--Matt. 15:27; Mark 7:28--Matt. 16:6-9; Mark 8:17-19--Matt. 20:33; Mark 10:51; Luke 18:41--Matt. 21:9; Mark 11:9; Luke 19:38--Matt. 26:39; Mark 14:36; Luke 22:42--Matt. 28:5, 6; Mark 16:6; Luke 24:5, 6. Pilate illustrates the difference between firmness and obstinacy. In yielding the crucifixion of an innocent man, Pilate showed a pitiable lack of firmness; in insisting on retaining an insulting inscription, he showed a petty obstinacy. In this inscription he was an unconscious prophet of the truth to all on-lookers--Greek, Roman, Jew. Comp. John 11:51, 52.

23 Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus, took his garments, and made four parts, to every soldier a part; and also _his_ coat: now the coat was without seam, woven[701] from the top throughout.

[701] Exod. 39:22.

24 They said therefore among themselves. Let us not rend it, but cast lots for it, whose it shall be: that the scripture might be fulfilled, which saith,[702] They parted my raiment among them, and for my vesture they did cast lots. These things therefore the soldiers did.

[702] Ps. 22:18.

=23, 24.= The account of John of this incident is fuller and more exact than those of the other Evangelists. Comp. Matt. 27:35; Mark 15:24; Luke 23:34. There were four soldiers--a quaternion--detailed to watch the execution of the sentence of the procurator. The clothing of the convicted was the perquisite of the soldiers. The outer garments of Christ were divided among them, one to each. The inner garment, or tunic, was a seamless robe, woven in one piece, probably of wool. There is no ground for the fanciful comparison of this robe with those worn by the priests, as though it indicated a priestly function on Christ’s part. There is more reason in the surmise that it was a gift to him by some of the women who had followed him from Galilee (Luke 8:1-3).--But this is a mere surmise, having no other support than the fact that the soldiers seem to have recognized in it a peculiar value, a garment which it were a pity to destroy. Dice were in Rome what cards are in modern life. One of the soldiers took a set out of his pocket; the helmet would have served as a dice-box; and thus, under the shadow of the cross, they gambled for this seamless robe. The incident affords a most striking illustration of the inhumanity of man, and scarcely less of the indurating influence of the passion for gambling. “No earthly creatures but gamblers could be so lost to all feeling as to sit down coolly under a dying man to wrangle for his garments, and arbitrate their avaricious differences by casting dice for his tunic, with hands spotted with his spattered blood, warm and yet undried upon them.”--(_H. W. Beecher._) The twenty-second Psalm, to the prophecy of which John refers, was regarded by the Jews, as it has been universally regarded by all Christian critics, as a Messianic Psalm. A curious illustration of fanciful interpretation is afforded by Wordsworth’s treatment of this scene, though he quotes Augustine as his authority: The parted garments is an emblem of the church in its universality, to be sent out into the four quarters of the globe; the unparted garment is emblematic of the church in its unity, to be kept whole and unparted; the gambling soldiers are an emblem of those who treat the unity of the church of Christ as a matter of indifference.

25 Now there stood by the cross of Jesus his mother, and his mother’s sister, Mary the _wife_ of Cleophas,[703] and Mary Magdalene.

[703] Luke 24:18.

26 When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by,[704] whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, Woman,[705] behold thy son!

[704] ch. 13:23.

[705] ch. 2:4.

27 Then saith he to the disciple, Behold thy mother![706] And from that hour that disciple took her unto his own[707] _home_.

[706] 1 Tim. 5:2.

[707] ch. 16:32.

=25-27. Now there stood by the cross of Jesus his mother=, etc. There is some question whether we are to understand by this verse that there were _four_ women there, or only three. Some scholars read the phrases “his mother’s sister” and “Mary of Cleophas” as in apposition, and suppose them to refer to the same person; but the better opinion regards them as different persons, the mother’s sister being identified with Salome, the mother of James and John, who, if this interpretation be correct, were own cousins to Jesus. See Note on the Twelve Apostles, Matthew, ch. 10, Vol. I, p. 148, where this question is more fully discussed. It is important only in its bearing on the question of the relationship of Jesus to James and John.--=Woman, behold thy son; * * * behold thy mother.= Some doubt has been thrown on this incident by rationalistic critics, who have thought it improbable that these women could have been standing near enough to the cross to hear the words of Jesus; or that they could have been willing to do so; or that the incident, if it really occurred, could have escaped the other Evangelists; for it is peculiar to John. The answer to this criticism is admirably given by Dr. Furness: “Unquestionably it must have been agonizing to her to witness that awful sight. And it would have been no less agonizing to her to keep at a distance from him. May she not have thought within herself, ‘It kills me to see him suffer so, but I cannot lose a word that may fall from his lips; perhaps he may speak to me’? The women friends of Jesus stood looking on at a distance; but if there were one among them who stood nearer to the cross than the others, it must have been his mother. Here again the words of Jesus to his mother and the beloved disciple lose the living truth of nature in our Common Version, which gives them in the form of complete sentences, ‘_Woman, behold thy son_,’ and to John, ‘_Behold thy mother_.’ But in the original it is ‘_Woman! look! thy son!_’ and to John, ‘_Look! thy mother!_’ brief as possible, ejaculatory, broken, and in the fullest accord with the physical condition in which he then was--a state of extreme torture, admitting only at the moment of such imperfect utterance. His mother was not very near the cross, but near enough to allow Jesus, by a strong effort mastering his agony, to gasp out these few words, leaving it to the keen sense of his mother and John to make out his meaning. Indeed, if I could suspect such an incident as this to be an invention, I should not know what limit to assign to the inventive power of the authors of the Gospels.”--(_Notes on Schenckel’s Character of Jesus._)--=And from that hour that disciple took her to his own.= The words _from that hour_ are not to be taken literally, as though John and the mother of Jesus did not remain till death had brought the lingering tortures of the crucifixion to an end. The words _his own_ are more significant without the addition of the word _home_, added by the translators. John took the mother into his own circle, and as his own mother, from that time. The language does not imply that he had a fixed domicile in Jerusalem. This is not inherently probable, for he was a Galilean; and certainly nothing recorded had occurred to make any of the disciples prior to this time inclined to take up a permanent residence in Jerusalem.

28 After this, Jesus, knowing that all things were now accomplished, that the scripture[708] might be fulfilled, saith, I thirst.

[708] Ps. 69:21.

29 Now there was set a vessel full of vinegar: and they filled a spunge with vinegar, and put _it_ upon hyssop, and put _it_ to his mouth.

30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It[709] is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave[710] up the ghost.

[709] ch. 17:4.

[710] Isa. 53:10, 12; Heb. 2:14, 15.

=28-30.= See Matt. 27:47-49, notes. The incident is common to all the Evangelists, but their accounts are quite different. John alone repeats the utterance, “It is finished,” which is to be regarded not merely as a presage of death, equivalent to, The era of suffering is ended, the era of joy begins; but as triumphant and prophetic: The work which thou gavest me to do is finished (ch. 17:4); and this because Christ died once for all, thus perfecting a sacrificing which needs never to be repeated (Heb. 9:28), and because by it he offers to the believer a redemption which is finished, and which needs not to be supplemented to make it efficacious. The cry of almost despair, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” was followed by the cry of triumph, uttered with a loud voice (Matt. 27:50; Mark 15:37; Luke 23:46); and then, with the prayer, “Father, into thy hands I commit my spirit” (Luke 23:46), he bowed his head and gave up the ghost. Some scholars (_Chrysostom_, _Hengstenberg_, _Godet_, etc.) hold that the reference to prophecy here is to Psalm 69:21, and that the meaning is that Christ said “I thirst” in order to fulfill prophecy; others (_Meyer_, _Luthardt_) make the phrase “that the Scripture might be fulfilled” dependent on the preceding clause, and the meaning to be that all things were accomplished that the Scripture might be fulfilled. This seems to me to be the better interpretation. The other makes Christ utter the expression of thirst for the purpose of calling forth in others the fulfillment of a prophecy. It may be remarked here that the constant use of the phrase _that the Scripture might be fulfilled_ gives to a casual reader the impression that a multitude of minor incidents were ordered by God, and unimportant acts were performed by Christ, merely to fulfill O. T. prophecy. The reader must, however, remember that the Gospels were written primarily for Jewish readers in large measure, and that the test by which every Jew determined whether or no Jesus was the Messiah was by asking the question, Does he fulfill the ancient prophecies? While, therefore, it is true that Christ’s life does fulfill, even in marvellously minute details, the prophecies of the O. T., it is also true that these fulfillments are pointed out by the Evangelists with an emphasis which in our time seems excessive, but which was not so in their age and for their immediate purpose. Compare the apostolic speeches to Jewish audiences, as reported in Acts, which are almost wholly devoted to proving that Christ’s life and death were in accordance with ancient Jewish prophecies.

31 The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation,[711] that the bodies should not remain[712] upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for[713] that sabbath day was an high day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and _that_ they might be taken away.

[711] verse 42.

[712] Deut. 21:23.

[713] Lev. 23:7, 8.

32 Then came the soldiers, and brake the legs of the first, and of the other which was crucified with him.

33 But when they came to Jesus, and saw that he was dead already, they brake not his legs:

34 But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came thereout blood[714] and water.[715]

[714] Heb. 9:22, 23; 1 John 5:6, 8.

[715] 1 Pet. 3:21.

35 And[716] he that saw _it_ bare record, and his record is true; and he knoweth that he saith true, that ye might believe.

[716] 1 John 1:1-3.

36 For these things were done, that the scripture[717] should be fulfilled, A bone of him shall not be broken.

[717] Exod. 12:46; Numb. 9:12; Ps. 34:20.

37 And again another scripture[718] saith, They shall look on him whom they pierced.

[718] Ps. 22:16; Zech. 12:10; Rev. 1:7.

=31-37. Because it was the preparation.= That is, for the Sabbath. At first the hours, then the entire day, immediately preceding the Sabbath, was called by the Jews the Preparation. See on ver. 14, and more fully on Mark 15:42. The Jews, who had no hesitation about compassing by the most unscrupulous methods the death of an innocent man, were scrupulous about leaving his corpse to hang on the cross over the Sabbath--a notable illustration of Sabbatical ceremonialism. It was the Roman custom to leave the corpse to putrefy; this was forbidden by the Jewish law, which, partly as a sanitary, partly as a ceremonial regulation, required immediate burial. See Deut. 21:23.--=That their legs might be broken.= A barbarous but not uncommon method of accelerating death, adopted in order to enhance rather than mitigate the horrors of the execution.--=Then came the soldiers and brake the legs=, etc. The implication is, of course, that this was done under the orders of Pilate. Nor is there anything inconsistent in this account with that in Mark (Mark 15:44), that Pilate was surprised to learn that Jesus was dead, and inquired into the certainty of the fact before giving permission to Joseph of Arimathea to remove the body. For when the death of Jesus was reported to him, the circumstances would also have been reported; and thus Pilate would have known that the soldiers found him already dead when they came to break the legs of the three.--=But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came thereout blood and water.= On the physical significance of this fact, see below, Note on the Physical Cause of Christ’s Death. From it the spiritualizing commentators have drawn many mystical lessons, most of them of very doubtful profit; _e. g._, the comparison of the drawing of Eve from the side of Adam and the drawing of the church from the side of Christ; the necessity of both blood and water to regeneration (ch. 3:5); the use of both as emblems of the sacraments, etc. All such uses of this incident belong at best to the poet, not the commentator, and its use even by the poet must be cautious, or it becomes unprofitable. The object of the spear-thrust was not to determine whether death had actually taken place so much as to ensure death, if there were any doubt. The record is given partly to set at rest the ancient Gnostic skeptical whim that the death took place only in seeming; it equally does set at rest the suggestion of more modern skepticism that Christ merely fainted from exhaustion and was subsequently restored by the disciples.--=And he that saw it bare record, and his record is true=, etc. The use of this phraseology shows the importance which John gave to this particular fact; partly, perhaps, because it established the all-important fact of the actual death of the Lord, the culmination of his life of self-sacrifice, and equally the foundation of that proof of his divinity which is afforded by his resurrection from the dead. But I believe that it also gives emphasis to the real cause of the death of our Lord--a broken heart, broken for the sins of the world, which he bore on the tree. It is also a water-mark of authorship. “The testimony thus declared to be veracious is just the record itself which the narrator was setting down; and, as he says it comes from no other than the eye-witness, he certainly gives us to understand that he, the Evangelist, is also the disciple whom Jesus loved.”--(_James Martineau._)--The prophetic Scriptures referred to are Exod. 12:46 and Zech. 12:10. The first passage, “A bone of him shall not be broken,” refers primarily to the paschal lamb; but that lamb was regarded by the Jews, and is treated both by the Old Testament and the New, as a type of the Lamb of God that taketh away the sins of the world.

* * * * *

NOTE ON THE PHYSICAL CAUSE OF CHRIST’S DEATH.--The immediate cause of Christ’s death is veiled in obscurity; for a brief statement of various critical opinions on this subject, see Meyer’s notes on this passage. I believe that there is at least good reason for the opinion that he died of a literally broken heart. Crucifixion produced a very lingering death. No vital organ was directly affected. The victim rarely died in less than twenty-four hours. Instances are recorded of his lingering a full week. It was customary to dispatch the condemned after a few hours of torture by speedier means. This was done in the case of the thieves. Pilate was surprised at the intelligence that Jesus was already dead. The guard seems to have shared that surprise. Up to the last moment there was no sign of weakness, no decay of power or vitality. Jesus conversed with the thief and spoke to his friends. His last cry was not that of exhausted nature; he cried with a loud--literally great, _i. e._, strong--voice. His death was instant. There was something remarkable in it--something that attracted the attention of the centurion and his band. It followed immediately after the cry, “My God! my God! why hast thou forsaken me?” This agony succeeded that of Gethsemane. In that midnight struggle the heart and blood-vessels were affected. The palpitation of the heart was so intense as to cause bloody sweat--a phenomenon rare, but not unknown, and produced by intense mental excitement. That this was a truly bloody sweat, see Luke 22:44, note. The heart would probably have been weakened by such an experience. A repetition of the agony then endured might truly rupture the membrane of the heart. Such an experience has been known to produce such a result. If it did, death would instantly ensue. The blood would flow into the pericardium, an outer sac in which the heart is enclosed; there it would be liable to separate very rapidly into clots of extravasated blood and water. When the soldier thrust the spear into Jesus’ side, it was probably with a double purpose: to ascertain whether Jesus was dead; to ensure his death if he were not. For this purpose he would aim at the heart. The spear would pierce, of course, the left, not the right side, as portrayed in nearly all art representations of the crucifixion. The water, followed and accompanied by the clots of blood, would flow from the wound. It is impossible to account for this phenomenon, not only recorded by John, but evidently regarded by him of considerable importance, except upon the hypothesis of a broken heart, or of some organic disease. Andrews’s hypothesis that it was supernatural has nothing but a devout surmise to sustain it. The reader who desires to investigate this subject more thoroughly will find by far the fullest and ablest discussion of it in Stroud’s _Physical Cause of the Death of Christ_, London, 1847, especially ch. iv, pp. 73-156, and notes iv and v, pp. 389-420. If this is not within his reach, he will find a brief but adequate statement of the argument in M’Clintock and Strong’s _Biblical Cyclopædia_, art. _Crucifixion_.

38 And after this Joseph of Arimathæa, being a disciple of Jesus, but secretly for[719] fear of the Jews, besought Pilate that he might take away the body of Jesus: and Pilate gave _him_ leave. He came therefore, and took the body of Jesus.

[719] ch. 9:22; 12:42.

39 And there came also[720] Nicodemus, which at the first came to Jesus by night, and[721] brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about an hundred pound _weight_.

[720] ch. 3:1, 2; 7:50.

[721] 2 Chron. 16:14.

40 Then took they the body of Jesus, and wound[722] it in linen clothes with the spices, as the manner of the Jews is to bury.

[722] Acts 5:6.

41 Now in the place where he was crucified there was a garden; and in the garden a new sepulchre, wherein was never man yet laid.

42 There[723] laid they Jesus therefore because[724] of the Jews’ preparation _day_; for the sepulchre was nigh at hand.

[723] Isa. 53:9; 1 Cor. 15:4.

[724] verse 31.

=38-42. After this came Joseph of Arimathea.= Of him nothing is known except what may be gathered from the accounts of the Evangelists concerning him in this connection. Mark implies that he was a member of the Sanhedrim (Mark 15:43), and Luke that he had nothing to do with the condemnation of Jesus; probably was not present (see Luke 23:51, note), either because he knew what was coming before them and that his resistance would be in vain, or because the others knew his character, and did not summon him. Luke also describes him as a “good man and just.” His act in requesting the body of Christ after the crucifixion was one requiring some courage. In later martyrdoms such a request cost men their lives; in this case it must at least have cost Joseph much obloquy. The site of Arimathea is entirely uncertain. The effect of Christ’s death to make the cowardly strong is noticed by all commentators.--=Pilate gave him leave.= After making sure that Christ was really dead (Mark 15:44, 45). --=Took the body of Jesus.= This taking down from the cross was probably done by the loving hands of the disciples; this is more probable than that it was done by the Roman soldiers. Their last duty was performed when they made sure of the death of the condemned.--=There came also Nicodemus.= It was now even, that is, the early evening, probably between four o’clock and sunset. See Matt. 27:57, note. On the character of Nicodemus, see ch. 3:1, note.--=Brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about a hundred pounds weight.= “Myrrh-resin and aloe-wood; these fragrant materials (Ps. 45:8) were placed, in a pulverized condition, between the bandages. But the surprising quantity (comp. ch. 12:3) is here explained from the fact that superabundant reverence in its sorrowful excitement does not easily satisfy itself; we may also assume that a portion of the spices was designed for the couch of the body in the grave” (_Meyer_); or to be burned. See below.--=As the manner of the Jews is to bury.= There is no evidence that the Hebrews ever practised systematic embalming, as the Egyptians did. In the O. T. there is but one mention of any such practice, that of the case of Asa, and he was not properly embalmed, but laid in the bed which he had prepared for himself “with perfumes and spices” (2 Chron. 16:14). It appears to have been the custom in the time of Christ to wash the body and anoint it, then to wrap it in fine linen, with spices and ointments enveloped in the folds, and afterwards to pour more ointment upon it, and sometimes to burn spices. In the case of Christ, the approach of the Sabbath hurried the preparations of the body, which were not yet completed at sunset, and were left to be finished the day after the Sabbath.--Comparing the four accounts of the burial, it appears that the body was wrapped in fine linen, with some of the spices, and laid hurriedly away in a rock-hewn sepulchre in a garden near the place of the crucifixion, one in which no previous burial had ever taken place. According to Matthew, it belonged to Joseph (Matt. 27:59, 60; Mark 15:46; Luke 23:53, 54). For illustration of the body prepared for burial, see Acts 5:6, note; for illustration of Jewish tomb, see Mark 16:2-4, notes. For a striking sermon on the Significance of the Sepulchre in the Garden, sorrow amid flowers, see Harper’s edition of H. W. Beecher’s sermons.