was not rejected by our Lord because improperly applicable to him, but because it was improperly applied by one who regarded him only as a mere man, or at best but as a human being, not as the divine Messiah. The argument which has therefore been sometimes built upon this text, to prove that Christ himself disclaimed divinity, is wholly unsound; for our Lord did not in this case restrain one from calling him "good," who came professing his persuasion that he was a divine person; or one who entreated him to do an act which supposed divine power, and so might be considered as implying such a persuasion; but one who addressed him only as a teacher, good TEACHER, didaokaλe ayate, and proposed a question which all eminent teachers among the Jews professed to answer: "What good thing shall I do that I may have eternal life?" For want of attending to this, the orthodox, fearing the perverted use which Arians and Socinians have ever been ready to make of this passage, have too eagerly caught at a various reading, which appears in some мss. and versions, and which is supported by several of the fathers. It is, Τι με ερωτας περί του αγαθου ; "Why askest thou me concerning good?" But the internal evidence alone is destructive of this emendation, because it deprives what follows of all meaning; for whether we read the sequel as in the received text, Ουδεις αγαθος, ει μη εις, ο Θεός, "There is none good but one, that is, God," Οι Εις εστιν ο αγαθος, “ There is one that is good," &c.; the words have no perceivable connexion with the previous part of the reply, "Why askest thou me concerning

good?" which, according to this reading, means not the good being, but the good thing which was to be done in order to attain life. A most preponderating weight of authority ought to be produced from MSS. and versions before the text can be resigned to so disjointing and destructive a criticism; but the truth is, that the evidence from versions is nearly balanced, whilst that of the мss. is beyond comparison superior in favour of the common reading; which alone furnishes a consistent or indeed a conceivable meaning. For, as Campbell well observes, “nothing can be more pertinent than to say, 'If you believe that God alone is good, why do you call me so?' whereas nothing can appear less pertinent than, 'If you believe that God alone is good, why do you consult me concerning the good that you must do?""

Thus whilst he re

But if thou wilt enter into life, &c.—If thou art sincerely and seriously bent upon the great work of salvation, keep the commandments. proves him for using flattering titles, and through him still more forcibly reproved the pride of the Pharisaic Rabbins, he condescends to answer an inquiry which appears to have been proposed with an honest intention. The answer of our Lord is not to be understood as given with reference to the covenant of works, the ground on which some commentators place it, under the idea that if it was a serious and not an hypothetic direction, it would be inconsistent with the doctrine of justification by faith. The answer is to be considered with reference to the young man's question, which was, not, "How shall I be justified?" but, “How shall I enter into eternal life," or be finally saved? It is in no respect therefore an answer inconsistent with Christian doctrine, which whilst it teaches that we are justified by faith only, as strongly enjoins that, if we would enter into life, and be finally saved, we must keep the commandments

Verse 18. He saith to him, Which, &c.He alludes to the vain distinctions made by the Pharisees between greater and smaller commandments, and the greatest and the least; or, it is perhaps still more probable, from the answer of our Lord, that he wished to know whether he referred to moral rules or to ritual observances, the importance of which had been so magnified by the Pharisees as to lead to the neglect of "the weightier matters of the law," justice, mercy, and charity. Those commandments which our Lord selects as necessary to be observed, do not exclude the others contained in the two tables, but are adduced as INSTANCES of moral, in opposition to ritual, obedience; and he leaves the decalogue to bring in the general command, "Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself," which is in Levit. xix. 18, in order to show that he comprehended all the moral precepts of the law, as well as those of the decalogue. This manner of quoting a part for the whole was familiar with the Jews. It is also observable, that our Lord does not follow the order of the commands of the second table; probably to show, as the Jews themselves express it, that "there is neither first nor last in the law;" and, that such is the perfection and fulness of every precept, that it is of no consequence which is first or last quoted. Various

reasons have been given, why Christ mentions only the duties of the second table, not the first; our duty to our neighbour, and not to God; but the true one lies upon the surface. The love of God, in which all the precepts of the first table are summed up, can only be made manifest and proved by our obedience to his moral commands; and where that is, in the true extent, and as arising from right principles, the other cannot be wanting. Nor is this a proof to others only; it is the best proof to ourselves, since we thus know, and perhaps only thus fully know, whether we truly love God, or are under the influence of a mere inoperative sentiment and emotion.

Verse 20. All these things have I kept from my youth up.-From this it appears, that, though a young man, he was not very young; for his answer supposes a considerable space between his coming to the knowledge of good and evil, and the present time. Indeed, his being a ruler, sufficiently indicates that he was not in the common acceptation a youth. That, as to the letter and his outward conduct, he had observed these commands, is probable; and that he had been from his childhood serious and moral. But that he knew not " the length and breadth of the law in its spirituality, is abundantly manifest; and that he formed much too high an estimate of his virtue, the sequel speedily proved.

man.

:

so that nothing shall be wanting in thee in order to attain eternal life, fully renounce the world, and become a spiritual Sell all that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven and come and follow me. Thus Christ apwas he brought to the test. proved of his seriousness and general character; and beholding in him what was amiable and hopeful, as it is said by Mark, "he loved him," he manifested a strong emotion of affection towards him; and now throws open to him that gate of life which he desired to enter. In a word, he invites him to become one of his select and more intimate disciples, to be trained up by him to a more perfect knowledge of spiritual things, and to be thereby qualified to teach them to others. But this privilege he could only obtain by making sacrifices; and, much as Christ loved him, he did not lighten the cross which he was to take up; and for a reason which ought to sustain us under the crosses which may be appointed to us to bear; he did not lighten it, because he loved him. This was his only way to life: a smaller demand might be made upon others consistent with their safety; but his secret attachment to wealth, rank, and external influence could only thus be detected and exposed to himself, and be cured by one mighty act of self-renunciation. But here his feeble virtue failed; for he went away sorrowful; not cavilling at the answer, not angry, but grieving, inwardly convinced that Christ had opened to him the only sure way of life, yet so entangled by earthly affections, that he could not make an effort towards it. For he had great possessions. This is a touching relation, heightened at every step by the seriousness of the young man's inquiry after eternal life; the respectful manner of his approach to Christ; the excellence of his moral character from his

earliest youth; the affection with which our Lord regarded him; the sorrowful struggle of spirit with which he departed; and, to close the whole, the perfect silence respecting him afterwards, which renders it probable that he gained the world, which he could not sacrifice, and lost his soul. It is left on record as a solemn warning against preferring the things of earth to the interests of our salvation; and especially to guard the young against closing their hearts against the calls of Christ, under the influence of worldly hopes and pleasures. On this young ruler being required to sell his property and renounce his civil offices and rank, and to follow Christ, it may be remarked, that not only did He who knew the heart of man see that this way was necessary for his salvation, but that it was no more than he had required of all the apostles, who left all and followed him, in order to be his immediate and peculiar disciples; and further, that, for a short time, and for reasons arising out of the peculiar state of the Jewish church after the day of pentecost, all the rich were required to sell their possessions, and form a common fund, out of which the wants of all were to be supplied, whilst they all gave themselves up to spiritual exercises, in order to lay the foundations of the new religion broad and deep among the wondering That this was people. a temporary arrangement, will be shown in the proper place. In this instance, however, the young man was not required to bring his wealth into the common stock, from which Christ and his disciples were supported. It was too great a property to be so applied. The whole wealth our Lord admitted appears to have been car ried by Judas in a bag, which was replenished as occasion required by the small contributions of a few pious persons, chiefly women; and even this was

heaven.

regarded with so little attention, that Judas occasionally robbed it without being called to account, although the omniscient eye of our Lord could not be deceived. The injunction, therefore, was, "Sell all thou hast, and give to the poor;" and our Lord thereby showed his disinterestedness in the advice he gave, whilst all suspicion would have been precluded, had the young man had the courage to follow the advice.

Verse 23. A rich man shall hardly enter, &c. He may enter, but he must do so bookows, with difficulty; and whether the kingdom of heaven be understood of the church on earth, or the state of the glorified in heaven, the words are equally applicable. To enter the visible church when in a state of prosperity and honour, when in fact, as in nations nominally Christian, that church embraces the world, is not difficult, being only a matter of education and example; but to be admitted among the truly humble and spiritual, whose names are written in heaven, and who only are considered in truth as composing "the kingdom of heaven," the rich man must make the same renunciations of worldly affections and pride now as in the time of Christ; and whatever difficulties riches then presented, exist now. The hinderances offered by riches to wisdom and virtue were perceived by heathen sages, and remarks to this effect appear in their writings; but their views of virtue were superficial and defective, and the case was but very partially known to them. Riches naturally entangle the heart; but earthly and heavenly affections are incompatible: wealth insensibly nurtures up a feeling of superiority to others; but in the Christian church each is to prefer another before himself: they tempt to ease and indul

gence; whereas the disciple of Christ is to deny himself, and keep his body under subjection: they are a trust given for the public good; but great is the danger lest the stewards of them should be found unfaithful, and spend upon their own vanities what God designed for others, and for their sakes made the rich the almoners of his bounty: they naturally give their possessors influence and power; but these are among the strongest temptations to arrogance, and self-will, and self-seeking, all of which are forbidden by the meekness and simplicity of our religion. How difficult then is it for a rich man to sink into that spirit of self-renunciation, in which alone he can enter Christ's spiritual kingdom, remain a lively member of it, and acquire a full meetness for the future state of felicity!

Verse 24. It is easier for a camel, &c.— It has been disputed among critics whether καμηλον, a camel, or καμιλον, a cable rope, should be here read; and Euthymius and Theophylact contend that both words have the latter meaning. But kaμλo has no support from мss.; and that kaunλov signifies a camel, cannot be doubted, however otherwise it may be figuratively used. Thus in the proverb, "To strain at a gnat and to swallow a camel," we must understand the animal so called, and not surely a cable rope. Some Mss. of authority, for dieλew, have eiseλew; but the sense is not thereby affected. The expression is proverbial and hyperbolical; and as in the Jewish writings we find impossible or absurd endeavours compared to an attempt to make "an elephant pass through the eye of a needle," of which Buxtorf and Lightfoot have given examples, there is no reason for departing from the usual sense. Our Lord here intends to express an impossi

bility, not a mere difficulty; but whether an attempt be made to pass a camel or a cable rope through the eye of a needle, çapis, from paπтw, to sew, the impossibility is expressed with equal strength. The conjecture of Harmer in his Observations, that there is here an allusion to the Arabs training their camels to kneel so as to enter low door-ways, though with difficulty, is wholly absurd.

Verse 25. Exceedingly amazed.—St. Mark says, "astonished out of measure," as still clinging to their notions of an earthly monarchy. That such a kingdom of heaven should exclude the rich and great, might naturally exceedingly surprise them; and indeed might equally surprise us but for what follows. For though we are instructed in the spiritual nature of the dominion of Christ, yet we expect that it shall become universal in extent, and impress its influence upon all ranks, according to the prophecies. But if it be impossible for the rich to enter, we might ask, whether as such they are to be excluded; or whether they must all part with their wealth as a necessary qualification for admission. Even then we should be surrounded with difficulties; because if one parted with his riches, others would gather them; and if property, by an equal distribution, were to be diffused among all, how the affairs of life could be carried on would be a perplexing inquiry. But the whole is relieved by what follows: with men this is impossible. Αδύνατον is not to be here taken in the sense of hard or difficult. And an example which has been quoted from Plato in favour of this softer sense is not satisfactory : πλούσιες δ' ου σφόδρα και

αγαθώς αδύνατον, “ But it is impossible that they who are very rich should be good also." For the sense of the term is as absolute in these words of Plato as those of our Lord and what is more conclusive is, that to take aduvator to signify difficult, destroys the point of the text; for we must suppose that, though difficult, it might be done without God, which is contrary to the whole doctrine of our salvation. With men, left to themselves, and without the special succours of an omnipotent grace, it is utterly impossible for a rich man to become so humble, so heavenly-minded, so simple in intention, so self-denying, as is necessary for his being a member of the true, spiritual church of Christ; but with God all things are possible, which is not to be taken as an abstract truth merely, but is applicable to the occasion. God, by his powerful and renewing influence upon the hearts of the rich, can bring them into this required state of mind, and allow them to retain their rank and riches, yet so that dignity, leisure, wealth, and influence shall all be consecrated to his service, employed for the benefit of mankind, and, by a reflected influence, for the spiritual benefit of the rich themselves. This is one of the noblest triumphs of the grace of God in man; but how few of the rich seek it, and thus become "rich towards God!" Such, however, even in our Lord's days, were Nicodemus, Joseph of Arimathea, Joanna the wife of Chusa, Herod's steward, and many illustrious examples afterwards.

Verse 27. We have forsaken all, and followed thee; what, &c.-This question appears to have been dictated by Peter's