Page images
PDF
EPUB

separated, may most justly be believed to coincide; and to go on, in conjunction, afresh.

The omission of these last six months, in the Gospel of St. Mark, is a natural consequence of their omission, in the Gospel of St. Matthew; and their omission in the Gospel of St. Matthew may be vindicated on various grounds. First, a great part of the time was spent in Judæa; in residing at Capernaum, or at Ephraim; which he either summarily supposes, or omits to notice only in common with St. Luke. Secondly, some portion more of it was occupied by the mission of the Seventy-an incident both in its cause, in its design, and in its effect, so similar to the previous mission of the Twelve, that one who had given so minute and particular an account of the latter might well be excused from taking any notice of the former. Thirdly, even after our Lord's circuit in person was begun, a great part of its events, and, consequently, of what must have entered into a regular historical account of it, as it may be seen from St. Luke, consisted of matters which had transpired before, and been related by St. Matthew in their proper place previously. I do not mean that these were identical, which is far from having been the case-but merely that they were similar; and consequently that, whether actions or discourses, there was no necessity, a priori, why they should be repeated by St. Matthew. On this subject, however, I refer the reader to my first Dissertation in the preceding volume, page 45.

It is a singular coincidence, however, that the precise point of time, at which St. Matthew and St. Mark do each resume the proper thread of their accounts, is with the passage of Jesus from Galilee into Peræa, as such. The renewal of his ministerial duties, and consequently their implicit suspension since the last return to Capernaum, (which was prior to the feast of Tabernacles) are also specified at the same time; Καὶ συμπορεύονται πάλιν ὄχλοι πρὸς αὐτὸν, καὶ ös εíúðei τáλív éèídaσnev aúтoúsa. This was, in fact, to resume the proper thread of the account as soon as the scene of our

Saviour's ministry was become strictly speaking new, or could be said to have got upon ground not absolutely familiar to their Gospels: and such was the case when it had once passed into Peræa.

The time of this passage is intimated by Matt. xix. 1—2. and by Mark x. 1; the most likely position of both which, as it appears to me, is between Luke xvii. 19. and xvii. 20 -xviii. 14. For, at the time of the performance of the miracle upon the lepers, the exordium of the account shews that our Lord was still in Galilee; and at the time of the subsequent discourses, wheresoever he was, he was in some one place; for all of them were consecutively delivered.

It is no difficulty that St. Matthew says, He came eiç tà ὅρια τῆς Ἰουδαίας, πέραν τοῦ Ἰορδάνου: that is, he came, on the other side the Jordan, to the confines of Judæa: not, as some commentators, and writers on the geography of Palestine, have supposed-to the confines of Judæa beyond the Jordanas if there were a Judaa, πέραν τοῦ Ἰορδάνου. The boundary of Judæa, and of Peræa, in the vicinity of Jericho, was the Jordan; and one who had reached the Jordan in that direction on the eastern side might truly be Isaid to have come to the confines of Judæa on the western. St. Mark, however, as if on purpose to explain St. Matthew, expresses himself without ambiguity as follows: "Epxται ΕΙΣ τὰ ὅρια τῆς Ἰουδαίας, ΔΙΑ τοῦ πέραν τοῦ Ἰορδάνου-on which no other construction can possibly be put.

The plain of Jericho was seventy stades in length, and twenty in breadth: its chief productions being the palm, and the balsam, tree b-as alluded to by Horace in this line,

Præferat Herodis palmetis pinguibus.

Epistol. II. ii. 184.

Its distance from Jerusalem was 150 stades, and from the banks of the Jordan was 60c: and the way from thence to Jerusalem was rocky, steep, and desert or solitary. The first indication that our Lord had now crossed the Jordan

b B. Jud. i. vi. 6. Justin. xxxvi. 3.

iv. viii. 3. Strabo xvi. 1085. Plin. H. N. xiii. 4e B. Jud. iv. viii. 3. Ant. Jud. v. 1. 4.

seems to be supplied at Matt. xx. 17-19. Mark x. 3234. Luke xviii. 31-34: for both this prediction could no where have been so well timed, as when he was just entering Judæa, and the term avaßaívoμev, found in each of the accounts, must be some presumptive proof that they were upon the high-road between the Jordan and Jerusalem; which was really an ascent, especially after it had arrived at Jericho. The same locality was, therefore, the scene of the petition of the sons of Zebedee, and of the first miracle on the blind man-each before the entrance into Jericho.

It is probable, consequently, that Jesus was arrived at the borders of Judæa, or within a day's journey of being so, when the Pharisees put their question concerning divorced -especially as it may be made to appear, that this question was put just before he withdrew into some private houseand the next incident recorded, but one, the application of the rich young ruler, followed in its consequences by the parable of the labourers, took place as he was coming out się ódóv—which means in resumption of his journey. The scene of this parable was probably Peræa; and the time, as probably, was morning. For Peræa, which was rich in vineyards—not the plain of Jericho, where none were planted-was much the most likely to have suggested the parable on the spot: and the time of the parable itself is laid in the spring of the year, and on the morning of some day-both which things would also be true of our Saviour's journey, if he was now only one day's journey distant from Jerusalem, and preparing to renew his progress aua πрwî, or with sunrise, in the day.

I infer, then, that the question of the Pharisees was put towards the close of one day-and that the proceedings of another are specified with the resumption of the journey, and the application of the Ruler, directly after. If our Saviour was at this very time at the ford of Bethabara, only 210 stades distant from Jerusalem, or even further off, I shall shew hereafter that by setting out in the morning, at

the ordinary time of commencing a journey in the East, and travelling leisurely at the rate of only two or three miles to the hour, he might yet pass through Jericho, and stop with Zaccheus, before the ninth hour of the day, within three or four Roman miles of Jerusalem. I shall shew also that this was the Friday before Passion-week-or one day before he actually arrived at Bethany, and seven days, or exactly one week, before he suffered.

DISSERTATION XVII.

On the village of Martha and Mary.

THAT the scene of the incident, which is recorded Luke x. 38-42. was some village of Galilee, the name of which, because it was altogether unnecessary to mention, the narrative has left indefinite, appears to me so certain a point, that I know not how it can reasonably be questioned; nor is there a stronger proof of the implicit submission, with which opinions are handed down from one commentator to another, as if prescriptively entitled to reception, than the very ancient, and very general, mistake, which has hitherto confounded it with Bethany.

Had the village been really Bethany, there is no conceivable reason why St. Luke should have suppressed its name -and those, who can be content with the reason which is commonly assigned, would be content with any thing. Nor is such an omission more improbable in itself, than contrary to the usage of the writer; especially in what, upon this principle, must have been the first instance of the occurrence of the name in his Gospel. With regard to the designations of places generally, throughout the Gospels, this rule may be observed to hold good-that, among a vast number of oλs and xapar, little short of a thousand, which might have been mentioned, though the names of what are called cities are sometimes specified, the names of towns or villages (including every thing below the rank or population of a city) all bearing appellations of Jewish, or native, etymon-all extremely barbarous and uncouth in their structure—and all, consequently, proportionably difficult to express intelligibly in Greek-never are. To this rule, the villages of Bethany, and of Bethphage-both in the neighbourhood of Jerusalem, both upon the high road from Jericho, over the mount of Olives, and both memorable for some of the most interesting particulars in the Gospel-his

« PreviousContinue »