Page images
PDF
EPUB

33 And when the multitude heard this, they were astonished at his doctrine.

Lord as arguing generally in favour of a future life. But though our Lord's reasoning proves this also, it does it incidentally; his main discourse being on the resurrection of the body, and the passage before us being quoted from the writings of Moses in confirmation of it. The force of the proof lies in this, that to be "their God" expressed the covenant made with these patriarchs; for it was the manner of the Jews to quote rather the heads of a passage in the Old Testament from which they argued, or to sum up its substance in a leading phrase; and this covenant, as the promise made to Abraham shows, comprehended the gift of Canaan to inherit it. But as Canaan was not put into the possession of Abraham and his immediate descendants, it followed either that the promise had failed, or, if not, that it related in its chief and highest sense to the inheritance of heaven, of which Canaan was an instituted type, and that they must be raised again to enjoy it. For if even the Sadducees had acknowledged the immortality of the soul, but denied only the resurrection of the body, yet the disembodied spirits of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob only, were put in possession of heavenly felicity; but the covenant was made with their whole persons as men, and could not be fulfilled but in their whole persons. In confirmation of this view of the argument,

it

may be remarked, that St. Paul considers the promise, "I will be their God," as involving the promise of the heavenly inheritance: "Wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for, yap, because he hath prepared for them a city." This is what showed God to be their God, that he had prepared for them a city, which they could not possess without a resurrection. Further, that the Jews thought the promise of Canaan to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, was personal, appears from those commentators who contend from this promise that these patriarchs must be raised from the dead to enjoy the land of Israel. The argument of

our Lord may therefore be thus stated: Since Jehovah became the covenant God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and even after their death declared that he continued to stand to them in that relation, they cannot be dead in your sense, that is, hopelessly and finally so. As to their souls, indeed, they are still alive; and with respect to their bodies, as the covenant was made with their entire persons, with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as perfect human beings composed of a body and reasonable soul; and whatever was implied in being "their God," related to their whole man; so whatever it promises, the whole man must enjoy; and though a temporary death has intervened as to the hody, it shall be raised up at the last day, that the covenant of God may stand firm in all its parts, and that he may be "their God" for ever. The additional clause which St. Luke introduces into this discourse shows that our Lord considered the patriarchs as dead only in a mitigated sense, such as was expressed, indeed, by believers in a resurrection, and especially under the gospel, by the term sleep; "For he is not a God of the dead, but of the living, for, or because, γαρ, all," not only Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, but all THe dead, "live unto him;" they live in his purpose and covenant, and are considered as alive by him that calleth "things that are not as though they were." It affords another proof that the learned Jews have not scrupled to avail themselves occasionally of the wisdom of Christ, that Manasseh Ben Israel, a Rabbi of the eighteenth century, borrows this argument of our Lord to prove the immortality of the soul, and nearly in his own words a little paraphrased. Producing the same passage from Exodus, he adds, "For God is not the God of the dead, for the dead are not; but of the living, for the living exist; therefore also the patriarchs, in respect of the soul, may rightly be inferred from hence to live."

Verse 33. They were astonished at his

k

34 But when the Pharisees had heard that he had put ¶ the Sadducees to silence, they were gathered together.

35 Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question, tempting him, and saying,

36 Master, which is the great commandment in the law? 37 Jesus said unto him, 'Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

k Mark xii. 28.

doctrine.-Accustomed as they were to hear the Pharisees' discourses on the importance of empty ceremonies, and trifling and perplexing traditions, affording no conviction to the understanding, or food to the soul, they were astonished at the clear and satisfactory manner in which the Teacher sent from God placed the greatest and most important subjects before them; the assured manner in which he spoke of eternal and invisible realities, as one possessing the most intimate knowledge of them; and the ease with which he detected the sophistry, and silenced the cavils, of their most noted doctors and disputants.

Verse 35. A lawyer asked him a question, tempting him.-A lawyer, voμños, one skilled in the interpretation of the law; the same as a scribe, which is the title given to him by St. Mark. Tempting him, that is, trying his skill; but whether with a bad or an innocent design does not appear. St. Mark, who relates the story more at large, mentions the commendation bestowed upon him by our Lord, which seems to exonerate him from the charge of captiousness. But he might be put forward by the rest, for the purpose of endeavouring to draw from our Lord some decision on the question, of which they might make a bad use.

Verse 36. Which is the great commandment in the law?-The positive is here used emphatically, and has therefore the force of the superlative. "Which is the greatest commandment in the law;" not the law of the two tables, but the whole law, comprehending all the precepts of Moses? On this subject the Jews differed,

1 Deut. vi. 5; Luke x. 27.

and warmly disputed, and continued to do so for a long time afterwards, as appears from their writings. As they called some commands "light," and others "weighty," some "great," others “little," it followed that some ONE must be the greatest and weightiest of them all; but on this they were not agreed. Some contended for the law of the sabbath, some for sacrifices, some for circumcision, some for the wearing of phylacteries, giving their reasons for each.

Verse 37. Jesus saith, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God, &c.-Our Lord answers thus explicitly, not out of respect to the Pharisees, but in order to avail himself of the attention excited by the question, to teach the most important truths of religion to the people. The terms heart, soul, mind, to which St. Luke adds strength, are not intended so much to convey distinct ideas, as to give force to the precept by the accumulation of words of nearly the same import. All interpretations, therefore, built upon the supposed variety of meanings which these terms are held to convey, are too refined. The words evidently mean that God is to be loved with the entire affection of the soul, maintained in its most vigorous exercise, so that all its faculties and powers shall be consecrated wholly to his service. This vigorous and entire application of the soul to an object is expressed in like forcible and reiterated terms in 2 Kings xxiii. 25: "And like unto him was there no king before him, that turned to the Lord with all his heart, and with all his soul, and with all his might, according to all the law of Moses." And how for

38 This is the first and great commandment.

m

39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

m Lev. xix. 18.

cibly is this grand precept commended to our reason as the first and great commandment, summing up in itself all the precepts of the first table, as they relate to God! It is first, in respect of its object; love being directed to the greatest and best Being, our Creator, Preserver, and Redeemer;-first, in the absolute character of its obligation; being bound upon us by the supreme and infinite excellence of God, and by the innumerable benefits which we have received, and shall be for ever receiving, at his hands;-first, in its sanctifying influence upon the heart; for as it is the intense love of a holy Being, it necessarily implies the intense love of holiness, and is indeed the vital purifying flame of holiness itself;-first, because it compels us by a sweet constraint to obedience to every other command; and so "love is the fulfilling of the law;" whilst the freedom of this obedience, as being that of entire choice and supreme delight, gives the noblest character to submission; -first, as it impels to the most arduous duties, and makes us willing to submit to the severest sufferings, for the glory of God;-first, because of that full and entire satisfaction of soul, which it produces by bringing us into communion with God himself, and feeding its own strength, and the strength of every other virtue, by its devotional intercourses with him; -and first, as being the root and principle of every other act of obedience; without which it can have no genuineness of character, and is considered as but a formal hypocrisy before God. "They," says an old writer, "idly interpret this precept who state, that it obliges us only to love God as much as we can in our lapsed state. The fall of man lost God no right, nor abated anything of the creature's duty. The law doth undoubtedly require us to love God in the highest degree, to be showed by the acts of the whole man, in obedience

Y

to all his commandments, and that constantly. It is our only hope, that this law is in the hands of a Mediator!" He hath procured pardon, upon our repentance and faith, for its violations; and again by his Spirit renews our nature to love God with all our hearts, and to serve him with all our strength.

Verse 39. And the second is like unto it. Not equal, for it is the SECOND; but LIKE unto it, in having the superiority over all others, the first and great commandment alone excepted; and LIKE to it, as being a precept of LOVE, and an efflux from the same principle directed to our neighbour. Judging from these writings, the Jews appear to have been fond of numbering the precepts of the law; and some such practice may have obtained in our Lord's time. The Talmud reckons them at 613; of which 365 are negative; and 248 affirmative. Our Lord's enumeration is Two, easily remembered, and embracing every species of obligation in its just and holy principle. There is nothing forbidden but what offends this law of love to God and man; nothing commanded but what is implied in it.

Thou shalt love thy neighbour, &c.— However the Jews in their bigotry might restrain the term neighbour to those of their own nation, their "friends in the law," as the phrase was; our Lord's parable of the good Samaritan has taught us to extend it to every man, so that not even our enemies are excepted. As thy self, "as heartily and sincerely, and as a man would desire to be loved by his neighbour, and to do all the good offices to him he would choose to have done to himself by him. This law supposes that men should love themselves, so as to be careful of their bodies, families, and estates; and in a spiritual way, so as to be concerned for their souls, and their everlasting happiness: and in like manner should men love their neighbours; in

40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

n

41 ¶ While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them,

42 Saying, What think ye of Christ? whose son is he? They say unto him, The son of David.

43 He saith unto them, How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying,

n Mark xii. 35; Luke xx. 41.

things temporal doing them no injury, but all the good they can; and in things spiritual praying for them, instructing them, and advising them as they would their own souls."

Verse 40. Hang all the law and the prophets. The law and the moral part of the prophetic writings, together with the discourses of our Lord and the writings of the apostles, contain a great number of particular precepts, all of which are bound upon us by the most solemn and indispensable obligation; and the knowledge of them is necessary for the guidance, so to speak, of the great affection of love to God and to our neighbour, into its particular and just operation. But all hang, depend, upon these two; so that they are the ROOT, and particular acts of obedience the BRANCHES. The supposed allusion, in these words, to the hanging up of tables of law in public places, adopted by some interpreters, is too far-fetched.

Verse 42. What think ye of Christ? &c. -The Pharisees had asked many questions of our Lord; and now, since they were collected about him in the temple, in the presence of the multitude, he proposes one to them; designing thereby to convict them of being in ignorance of the true character of Messiah, and to leave an impression of his superior nature upon the minds of his disciples, a truth as yet obscurely intimated, but which was soon to receive its strongest demonstration. What think ye of the Christ? whose Son is he? They say unto him, The Son of David; for in this they were all agreed, that the Messiah must be a descendant of David, of "his house and lineage," and

the heir of his throne, which was promised to him by the mouth of the prophets.

[ocr errors]

Verse 43. How then doth David in spirit call him Lord ?-The phrase, in spirit, signifies, under the influence of the Holy Spirit, as appears from St. Mark, who expresses it, For David himself, by the Holy Ghost, said," &c. This proves both that David wrote Psalın CX. under divine inspiration, and that it relates to the Messiah. The word KupLOS answers to the Hebrew 1178, Adon, which signifies, lord or master, the title of a superior. David was a monarch, and had no earthly superior in rank; and besides, the Messiah according to the flesh was to be his Son; how then, in what sense, does he call him Lord, saying, "Jehovah said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand?" How could he be his Lord, who was not to be born until many ages afterwards, and was certainly to have no secular dominion over him? This question the Pharisees could not answer, for indeed it admits of no reply but one, which should acknowledge the divinity as well as the humanity of the Christ; for in no other sense but as God over all could he be David's Lord, his Lord then, even before he was born into the world, and his Lord when he should be born, as ruling over the dead of all past ages, as well as over all living men. This ancient doctrine of the Jewish church the Pharisees and Sadducees had, however, departed from; and as they had sunk into gross conceptions as to the kingdom of the Messiah, so they reduced their views of his character to a level with their worldly expectations. They now felt that their

[ocr errors]

44 The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool?

45 If David then call him Lord, how is he his son ?

46 And no man was able to answer him a word, neither durst any man from that day forth ask him any more questions.

CHAPTER XXIII.

1 Christ admonisheth the people to follow the good doctrine, not the evil examples, of the scribes and Pharisees. 5 His disciples must beware of their ambition. 13 He denounceth eight woes against their hypocrisy and blindness: 34 and prophesieth of the destruction of Jerusalem.

1 THEN spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples,

2 Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: 3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.

o Psalm cx. 1.

own scriptures were against them, and it
was this that silenced and confounded
them; for it is added, No man was able to
answer him a word. Their silence is,
however, instructive to us. It shows
that it was admitted among them that the
words quoted related to the Messiah; so
that the attempts of some of the more
modern Jews to give them another appli-
cation, are in denial of the opinion of their
ancestors. It shows also, that the term
LORD, as used by David, was not used,
as the modern deniers of Christ's divinity
would have it, to express merely the
office of the Messiah, so that with refer-
ence to the dignity of that office, David
might call him Lord, though his descend-
ant, and a mere man like himself.
why then did not the Pharisees make this
reply? Nothing could have been easier,
had the word borne that import only
among them, and they would easily have
escaped out of the difficulty of the ques-
tion. "But they answered him not a
word;" and thus tacitly confessed that
they had embraced opinions respecting
the Messiah irreconcilable with the de-
clarations of their own sacred books, and

For

with these words especially, which have no true comment but that which is contained in the words of the glorified Saviour himself, “I am the ROOT and the OFFSPRING of David, the bright and morning star."

Verse 46. Neither durst any man from that day forth ask him any more questions. -And thus our blessed Lord delivered himself from the intrusion of these captious and cavilling men, and was left to pursue his own great work without interruption to the time of his sufferings, which were now approaching; this being the third day before the passover, on which "he was sacrificed for us."

CHAPTER XXIII. Verse 1. The multitude and his disciples.-Both these had been auditors of his disputes with the Sadducees and Pharisees, and to them he now more immediately addresses himself.

Verses 2, 3. The scribes and the Pharisees, &c.-That is, such of the Pharisees as were scribes, or professionally learned in the interpretation of the law. These are said to sit in Moses's seat, because the doctors of the law delivered their dis

« PreviousContinue »