Page images
PDF
EPUB

tion from

Jerusalem

But, however interpreted, the moral purport of the scene remains the same the intimation that the strongest and most lively impressions were made upon the mind of Jesus, to withdraw him from the purely religious end of his being upon earth, to transform him from the author of a moral revolution to be slowly wrought by the introduction of new principles of virtue, and new rules for individual and social happiness, to the vulgar station of one of the great monarchs or conquerors of mankind; to degrade him from a being who was to offer to man the gift of eternal life, and elevate his nature to a previous fitness for that exalted destiny, to one whose influence over his own generation might have been more instantaneously manifest, but which could have been as little permanently beneficial as that of any other of those remarkable names, which, especially in the East, have blazed for a time and expired.

From the desert, not improbably supposed to be that of Quarantania, lying between Jericho and Jerusalem, where tradition, in Palestine unfortunately of no great authority, still points out the scene of this great spiritual conflict, and where a mountain (1), commanding an almost boundless prospect of the valleys and hills of Judæa, is shown as that from whence Jesus looked down unmoved on the kingdoms of the earth, the Son of Man returned to the scene of John's baptism.

In the mean time the success of the new prophet, the Baptist, had excited the attention, if not the jealousy, of the ruling authoDeputa- rities of the Jews. The solemn deputation appeared to inquire into his pretensions. The Pharisees probably at this time predominated to John. in the great council, and the delegates, as of this sect, framed their questions in accordance with the popular traditions, as well as with the prophetic writings (2): they inquire whether he is the Christ, or Elias, or the prophet (3). John at once disclaims his title to the appellation of the Christ; nor is he Elijah, personally returned, according to the vulgar expectation (4); nor Jeremiah, to whom tradition assigned the name of "the prophet," who was to rise from the dead at the coming of the Messiah, in order, it was supposed, to restore the tabernacle, the ark, and the altar of incense, which he was said to have concealed in a cave on the destruction of the Temple by Nebuchadnezzar, and which were to be brought again to light at the Messiah's coming (5).

The next day John renewed his declaration that he was the harbinger (6), described in the prophet Isaiah, who, according to the custom in the progresses of Oriental monarchs, was to go before,

(1) The best description of this mountain is in the Travels of the Abbé Mariti.

(2) The Sanhedrin alone could judge a tribe, the high priest, or a prophet. (Sanhedrin Paroch. i.) Hence "a prophet could not perish

out of Jerusalem." Luke, xiii. 33. Lightfoot, Harm. Ev.

(3) John, i. 19-28.

4) Wetstein. Nov. Test. in loc.
5) 2 Macc. ii, 4-8. xv. 14,
(6) John, i. 29. 34.

and cutting through mountains and bridging valleys, to make a wide and level way for the advance of the Great King. So John was to remove some of the moral impediments for the reception of Christ. At the same time, as Jesus mingled undistinguished among the crowd, without directly designating him, he declared the actual presence of the mightier teacher who was about to appear. The next day, in the more private circle of his believers, John did not scruple to point out more distinctly the person of the Messiah (1). The occasion of his remarkable speech (it has been suggested with much probability) was the passing of large flocks of sheep and lambs, which, from the rich pastoral districts beyond the river, crossed the Jordan at the ford, and were driven on to the metropolis, to furnish either the usual daily sacrifices or those for the approaching passover. The Baptist, as they were passing, glanced from them to Jesus, declared him to be that superior Being, of whom he was but the humble harbinger, and described him as "the Lamb of God (2), which taketh away the sins of the world." Unblemished and innocent as the meek animals that passed, like them he was to go up as sacrifice to Jerusalem, and in some mysterious manner to take away" the sins of mankind. Another title, by which he designated Jesus yet more distinctly as the Messiah, was that of the Son of God," one of the appellations of the Deliverer most universally admitted, though, no doubt, it might bear a different sense to different hearers.

[ocr errors]

Jesus de

signated

by John

as the Messiah.

Among the more immediate disciples of John this declaration of their master could not but excite the strongest emotions; nor can anything be more characteristic of the feelings of that class among the Jews than the anxious rapidity with which the wonderful intelligence is propagated, and the distant and awe-struck reverence with which the disciples slowly present themselves to their new master. The first of these were, Andrew, the brother of Simon (Peter), and probably the author of the narrative, St. John (3). ciples of Simon, to whom his brother communicates the extraordinary

(1) John, i. 35, 36.

(2) Supposing (as is the general opinion) that this term refers to the expiatory sacrifice of Christ, according to the analogy between the death of Jesus and the sacrificial victims, subsequently developed by the apostles (and certainly the narrower sense maintained by Grotius, and the modern learned writers (see Rosenmuller and Kuinoel in loc.) are by no means satisfactory), to the hearers of John at this time such an allusion must have been as unintelligible as the intimations of Jesus about his future sufferings to his disciples. Indeed, if understood by John himself in its full sense, it is difficult to reconcile it with the more imperfect views of the Messiah, evinced by his doubt during his imprisonment. To the Jews in general it can have conveyed no distinct meaning. That the Messiah was to be blameless, was strictly accordant with their notions, and his taking away sins," bore an intelligible Jewish sense; but taking them away by

his own sacrifice, was a purely Christian tenet,
and but obscurely and prophetically alluded to
before the death of Christ. How far the Jews
had any notion of a suffering Messiah (after-
wards their great stumbling-block) is a most
obscure question. The Chaldaic paraphrast cer-
tainly refers, but in very vague and contradictory
language (Isaiah, lii, 13. et seq.), to the Mes-
siah. See on one side Schoetgen, Hor. Heb ii.
181. and Danzius, de Aurp, in Meuschen; on
the other, Rosenmuller and Gesenius on Isaiah.
The notion of the double Messiah, the suffering
Messiah the son of Joseph, and the triumphant,
the son of David (as in Pearson on the Creed,
vol. ii.), is of most uncertain date and origin;
but nothing, in my opinion, can be more incre
dible than that it should have been derived, as
Bertholdt would imagine, from the Samaritan
belief. Bertholdt, e. 29.

(3) John, i. 37-42.

First dis

Jesus.

Jesus com

mences

as a

tidings, immediately follows, and on him Jesus bestows a new name, expressive of the firmness of his character. All these belonged to the same village, Bethsaida, on the shore of the lake of Gennesareth. On the departure of Jesus, when he is returning to Galilee, he summons another, named Philip. Philip, like Andrew, hastens away to impart the tidings to Nathanael, not improbably conjectured to be the apostle Bartholomew (the son of Tolmai or Ptolemy), a man of blameless character, whose only doubt is, that the Messiah should come from a town of such proverbial disrepute as Nazareth (1). But the doubts of Nathanael are removed by the preternatural knowledge displayed by Jesus of an incident which he could not have witnessed; and this fifth disciple, in like manner, does homage to the Messiah, under his titles "the Son of God, the King of Israel." Yet this proof of more than human knowledge, Jesus declares to be as nothing in comparison with the more striking signs of the Divine protection and favour, which he asserts, under the popular and significant image of the perpetual intervention of angels, that his chosen followers are hereafter to witness.

Jesus had now commenced his career: disciples had attached his career themselves to this new master, and his claim to a divine mission Teacher. must necessarily be accompanied by the signs and wonders which were to ratify the appearance of the Messiah. Yet even his miraculous powers had nothing of the imposing, the appalling, or public character, looked for, no doubt, by those who expected that the appeal would be made to their senses and their passions, to their terror and their hope, not to the more tranquil emotions of gratitude and love. But of this more hereafter.

First miracle.

nian.

The first miracle of Jesus was the changing the water into wine, Anti-Esse- at the marriage feast at Cana, in Galilee (2). This event, however, was not merely remarkable as being the first occasion for the display of supernatural power, but as developing in some degree the primary principles of the new religious revelation. The attendance of Jesus at a marriage festival, his contributing to the festive hilarity, more particularly his sanctioning the use of wine on such occasions, at once separated and set him apart from that sect with which he was most likely to be confounded. John, no doubt, passed with the vulgar for a stricter Essene, many of whom, it has been before said, observed the severest morality, and, in one great point, differed most widely from all their brethren. They disregarded the ceremonies of the law, even the solemn national festivals, and depreciated sacrifices. Shut up, in short, in their own monastic establishments, they had substituted observances of their own for those of the Mosaic institutes. In all these points, John, who no where

[blocks in formation]

appears to have visited Jerusalem, at least after his assumption of the prophetic office (for his presence there would doubtless have excited much commotion), followed the Essenian practice. Like them he was severe, secluded, monastic, or rather eremitical in his habits and language. But among the most marked peculiarities of the Essenian fraternity was their aversion to marriage. Though some of the less rigid of their communities submitted to this inevitable evil, yet those who were of higher pretensions, and doubtless of higher estimation, maintained inviolable celibacy, and had fully imbibed that Oriental principle of asceticism, which proscribed all indulgence of the gross and material body, as interfering with the purity of the immaculate spirit. The perfect religious being was he who had receded to the utmost from all human passion; who had withdrawn his senses from all intercourse with the material world, or rather had estranged his mind from all objects of sense, and had become absorbed in the silent and ecstatic contemplation of the Deity (1). This mysticism was the vital principle of the Essenian observances in Judæa, and of those of the Therapeutæ, or Contemplatists, in Egypt, the lineal ancestors of the Christian monks and hermits. By giving public countenance to a marriage ceremony, still more by sanctioning the use of wine on such occasions (for wine was likewise proscribed by Essenian usage), Jesus thus, at the outset of his career, as he afterwards placed himself in direct opposition to the other prevailing sects, so he had already receded from the practice of these recluse mystics, who formed the third, and though not in numbers, yet in character and influence, by no means unimportant religious party.

After this event in Cana (2), Jesus, with his mother, his brethren, Caperand some of his disciples, took up their abode, not in their native naum. town of Nazareth, but in the village of Capernaum (3), which was situated not far from the rising city of Tiberias, on the shore of the beautiful lake, the sea of Gennesareth. It was called the Village of Comfort, or the Lovely Village, from a spring of delicious water, and became afterwards the chief residence of Jesus, and the great scene of his wonderful works (4).

(1) It may be worth observing (for the connection of Jesus with the Essenes has been rather a favourite theory) that his illustrations so perpetually drawn from the marriage rite, and from the vineyard, would be in direct opposition to Essenian phraseology. All these passages were peculiarly embarrassing to the Gnostic ascetics. "Noiuit Marcion sub imagine Domini a nuptiis redeuntis Christum cogitari " detestatorem nuptiarum," he rejected from his Gospel, Luke, xiv. 7-11. See the Gospel of Marcion by Hahn in Thilo. Cod. Apoc. Nov. Testam. p. 444. and

449.

(2) Maundrell places Cana north-west of Nazareth; it was about a day's journey from Capernaum. Josephus (De Vitâ Suâ) marched all night from Cana, and arrived at Tiberias in the morning.

(3) John, ii. 12.

(4) Among the remarkable and distinctive peculiarities of the Gospel of St. John, is the much greater length at which he relates the events which occurred during the earlier visits of Jesus. to Jerusalem, about which the other Evangelists are either entirely silent or extremely brief. I cannot help suspecting a very natural reason for this fact, that John was the constant companion of his Master during these journeys, and that the other apostles were much less regular in their attendance upon him during these more distant excursions, especially at the earlier period. The Gospel of St. John (some few passages omitted) might be described as the acts of Jesus in Jerusalem and its neighbourhood.

First pass

over, A. D.

27.

The Passover approached (1), the great festival (2) which assembled not only from all parts of Palestine, but even from remoter regions, the more devout Jews, who at this period of the year constantly made their pilgrimage to the Holy City: regular caravans came from Babylonia and Egypt; and no doubt, as we shall explain hereafter, considerable numbers from Syria, Asia Minor, and the other provinces of the Roman empire. There can be no doubt that at least vague rumours of the extraordinary transactions which had already excited public attention towards Jesus of Nazareth, must have preceded his arrival at Jerusalem. The declaration of the Baptist, however neither himself nor many of his immediate disciples might attend the feast, could not but have transpired. Though the single miracle wrought at Cana might not have been distinctly reported at Jerusalem-though the few disciples who may have followed him from Galilee, having there disseminated the intelligence of his conduct and actions, might have been lost in the multitude and confusion of the crowded city—though, on the other hand, the impressions thus made, would be still further counter-balanced by the general prejudice against Galilee, more especially against a Jesus at Galilean from Nazareth—still the son of Mary, even at his first appearance in Jerusalem, seems to have been looked on with a kind of reverential awe. His actions were watched, and though both the ruling powers, and, as yet apparently, the leading Pharisees kept aloof, though he is neither molested by the jealousy of the latter, nor excites the alarm of the former, yet the mass of the people already observed his words and his demeanour with anxious interest. The conduct of Jesus tended to keep up this mysterious uncertainty so likely to work on the imagination of a people thus ripe for religious excitement. He is said to have performed" many miracles," but these, no doubt, were still of a private, secret, and unimposing character; and on all other points he maintains the utmost reserve, and avoids with the most jealous precaution any action or language which might directly commit him with the rulers or the people.

Jerusalem

The Tem

One act alone was public, commanding, and authoritative. The ple a mart. outer court of the Temple had become, particularly at the period of the greatest solemnity, a scene of profane disorder and confusion. As the Jews assembled from all quarters of the country, almost of the world, they were under the necessity of purchasing the victims for their offerings on the spot; and the rich man who could afford a sheep or an ox, or the poor who was content with the humbler oblation of a pair of doves, found the dealer at hand to supply his wants. The traders in sheep, cattle, and pigeons, had therefore been permitted to establish themselves within the pre

(1) John, ii. 13.

(2) Many writers suppose that about half a year passed between the baptism of Jesus and

this passover. This is possible; but it appears to me that there is no evidence whatever as to the length of the period.

« PreviousContinue »