or rudely formed, admits of being confounded with the numeral note for 900. To revert, however, from this digression. If Galilee contained, within its limited extent, 204 towns, and more than three millions of souls, the half of the population of Judæa, we need no other answer, than the statement of this fact, to a question which may probably have often occurred to reflecting minds-why the ministry of our Lord, for by far the greater part of its duration, was exclusively confined to that country? There might be many and sufficient reasons why it should not have been permanently discharged in Judæa as such; and if any part must be fixed upon, distinct from that, what could be fitter than Galilee? What scene could be more favourable for the spiritual harvest, on which he was preparing to enter? or what tract of country in the Roman empire, at the same juncture of time, could be shewn to have been, in proportion to its extent, so thickly peopled as this? Where, in short, could our Lord's ministry have both been fixed, and been discharged, so as to be fixed and discharged among his brethren, according to the flesh, as such-so as to dispense its benefits on the widest possible scale-with more propriety than here?—where, perhaps, half the population of the country, in general, was ready assembled, within a third of the territory, in particular. Now I will not assume, though the language employed by the Evangelists would almost justify us in assuming, that, in the course of the same progress, however general, our Lord would visit each of these towns and villages in its turn; I will assume that he would visit only one half of the number; and, what is no extravagant supposition, that he would pass, upon an average, one day in each. I will assume also that, for every week of the continuance of the progress, he would necessarily be stationary somewhere during the four and twenty hours of the Sabbatic rest. Even upon this calculation, which every one will allow to be moderate and reasonable, the duration of a circuit would never be less than three months, and, probably, never less than four. This, then, we may assume, in every instance of what is perceived to have been a general circuit, not otherwise limited, as the nearest approximation to the exact measure of its continuance: and, consequently, the circuits, which began about the feast of Pentecost, would be over about the feast of Tabernacles; of which fact we shall find, if I am not mistaken, incidental notices supplied, on more than one occasion, by the gospel-narrative itself. And it is a general argument in favour of its truth, first, that, on this principle, a circuit would commonly begin after wheatharvest was over, and terminate when seed-time was ready to begin; the effect of which would be that the people every where would be enabled to attend upon our Saviour, with the least inconvenience to themselves: and, secondly, that it would coincide with the period of the year, when travelling could best be performed only in the morning and the evening of the day, and resting throughout it, so obviously necessary for the purpose of teaching, would not be more necessary for that purpose, than expedient in itself. The course of the present circuit, we may conjecture from St. Matthewk, was, upon the whole, as follows-first, along the western side of the Jordan, northward; which would disseminate the fame of Jesus in Decapolis: secondly, along the confines of the Tetrarchy of Philip, westward; which would make him known throughout Syria: thirdly, by the coasts of Tyre and Sidon, southward: and, lastly, along the verge of Samaria, and the western region of the lake of Galilee-the nearest points to Judæa Proper, and to Peræa-until it returned to Capernaum. In the course of the progress, if he visited Bethsaida, he might be joined by Philip1; if he visited Cana, by Nathanaelm; and if there was such a village as Iscara", by Judas Iscariot also. All our Lord's disciples were natives of Galilee, and, therefore, first became disciples in Galilee. No incident, however, is expressly recorded as having transpired on the circuit itself; a circumstance by no means more peculiar to this first, than Chrys. Oper. ii. 219. k iv. 24. 25. 1 John. i. 45. Theophyl. Comm. in Matt. 51. 160. m xxi. 2. n to any other, of the number, except the last; for these periods in our Lord's ministry, though in themselves integral portions of its whole duration, and as full of action and employment as any, are invariably the least related in detail of all. The first sermon from the Mount°, delivered, as I apprehend, at the close of the circuit, is so far an exception to this assertion. If it was delivered on what tradition has pointed out as the mountain of the beatitudes, it was delivered near to Capernaum; and, therefore, either at the very beginning, or at the end, of the circuit; the latter of which is much the more probable supposition: the former would be inconsistent with both the cause alleged for the sermon P, and what happened at the outset of the circuit. Whether this is the same sermon with the sermon on record elsewhere', or distinct from that, is a question which must be considered hereafter by itself. The next event, and posterior to this circuit of Galilee, because an event which took place on the lake of Capernaum, and, consequently, supposed our Lord to have been returned to Capernaum, is the miraculous draught of fishess; a very different transaction, as I shall prove elsewhere, from the call of the four disciples in St. Matthew, or in St. Markt. The time of this event, then, could not be earlier than the first feast of Tabernacles, when the circuit would expire; and it might be later. The first feast of Tabernacles in the course of our Saviour's ministry began October 4. and expired October 11.u The cure of the leper, which is next recorded, we may conclude, for the following reasons, did not take place in Capernaum, nor, consequently, while Jesus was still resident there even after his return. First, Luke v. 12. is much too indefinite to be understood of so well known a city as Capernaum, especially after the mention of the lake, just before: secondly, the miracle took place some • Matt. v-viii. 1. Luke vi. 20-end. i. 16—20. P V. I. a Mark i. 35-39. Luke iv. 42—44. 1-II. Matt. iv. 18-22. Mark ▾ Matt. viii. 2-4. Mark i. 40-45. where near the desertx, and, therefore, we may presume, not in the land of Gennesaret: thirdly, the entering into Capernaum, Mark ii. 1. is opposed to the entering into Capernaum, i. 21. before, as a second instance of the kind to a first; which implies either that our Lord had never entered Capernaum again, as yet, since his departure thence at i. 35. or that if he had, he had left it again before the return, ii. 1: fourthly, lepers were forbidden by the Jewish law to enter into the towns or the villages; they were condemned to live apart from society, and to wear their clothes rent, as a mark of their situationy. If this was the case, even St. Luke's expression, As he was in one of the cities, must not be too strictly understood; nor further than to denote that, when this leper, probably having seen him from afar2, fell down before him, he was in the neighbourhood of some one city. We possess, then, in this fact, an intimation that, posterior even to the first circuit of Galilee, Jesus was engaged somewhere distinct from Capernaum, which otherwise we should not have discovered; and the discovery is so far valuable, that it helps to account for an integral period of time, between the close of this first circuit, and the arrival of the next Passover-an interval of nearly six months; for which, however, only two or three circumstances are left on record. Part of this time might be spent in Capernaum, after the return-part, and perhaps the greatest portion, in the studied seclusion and privacy which followed the miracle, and were intended to avoid the effects of its notoriety itself. For he did not return to Capernaum, except & egova which may mean a considerable time; and when he did return, it was not far from the close of the first year of his ministry. - And hence we may infer that this cure of the leper was the first specific miracle of the kind, which had yet been performed; and that this is the true reason why each of the three Evangelists concurs to relate this one, but no other of y Lev. xiii. 45. 46. z Vide Luke xvii. 12. * Luke v. 16. Mark i. 45. Contra Apion. i. 31. 2 Kings vii. 3. Jos. . Mark ii. 1. the same description again. Such miracles as these, considered in a symbolical point of view, were peculiarly characteristic of a Messias, who should make atonement for sin; as the plague of leprosy itself was of the spiritual or moral taint of sin; and it is evident, from the account of our Saviour's miracles, both the general and the specific, as hitherto given, that, like those which he empowered the Twelve, and also the Seventy, to perform in his own lifetime, limiting their power to these, they had yet consisted only in the cure of diseases, strictly so called-vóro xal paλáxia—and in the ejection of unclean spirits; that is, in the simplest kind of miracles in general. The great notoriety produced by this miracle, and, consequently, the necessity of withdrawing himself for a time, which it imposed on our Lord, make in favour of the same conclusion. It is added, however, by St. Luke, that the multitude found him out, even in the deserts, that is, in the less populous parts of the country; (for, wherever he was, and however desirous of concealment, still he could never be absolutely hidb;) and that they still resorted to him, to hear him, and to be healed from their infirmities; so that this retirement, long as it might continue, was not idly or unprofitably spent. Yet Jesus himself, though pursued by the people, kept purposely Withdrawing into the deserts, and praying. The next event, the cure of the paralytic, is clearly to be placed in Capernaum, and in some private house, (probably Peter's,) our Lord's usual abode there. Nor could it have been long after the return; for the bringing in of the paralytic was produced, according to St. Mark, by the news of this return; and hence the presence of Scribes from all the surrounding villages, (xua,) which St. Luke alludes to, is very probably to be explained. They might have come with our Saviour to Capernaum, as part of the resort mentioned before; for Josephus also adverts to the xúμav ygaμμateis by named, as a sort of village schoolmasters, or b Mark vii. 24. Matt. ix. 2-8. Mark ii. 1—12. Luke v. 17-26. |