I hope more fully to make appear, by comparing the several parts of
this hiftory together, that the women came at different times to the
fepulchre, and not all at once, as has been imagined. The bufinefs
that carried them all thither, was, to pay their laft refpects to their
deceased Master, by embalming his body; for which end they had
bought and prepared unguents and fpices; but were obliged to defer
their pious work by the coming on of the Sabbath, "upon which
"day they refted," fays St. Luke," according to the commandment."
On the eve of the Sabbath, therefore, when they parted, and each
retired to their feveral habitations, it is moft natural to fuppofe that
they agreed to meet upon a certain hour at the fepulchre; and, as the
errand upon which they were employed required day-light, the hour
agreed on in all probability was foon after the rifing of the fun;
their apprehenfion of the Jews, as well as their zeal to their mafter,
prompting them to take the earlieft opportunity. But Mary Magda-
lene, it feems, whether from a natural eagerness of temper, or a more
ardent affection for her Lord, to whom he had the greatest obliga-
tions, or from a higher caufe, fet out, together with the other Mary,
just as the day began to break, in order to take a view of the
fepulchre; and having either called upon Salome, or joined her in the
way, came thither, together with her, wew, early,' before the time
agreed on. This, in my opinion, is a very natural account of the
whole matter, and points out the importance of these remarkable
expreffions, "went to fee the fepulchre," in St. Matthew, and "who
"fhall roll away the ftone for us?" in St. Mark. For, 1ft, the rea-
fon of these two Marys fetting out fo early is here affigned: They
'went to take a view of the fepulchre,' i. e. in general, to fee if al
things were in the fame condition in which they had left them
two days before, that, if in that interval any thing extraordinary had
happened, they might report it to their companions, and in conjunc-
tion with them take their measures accordingly. Hence it is alfo
evident, in the second place, why they were fo few in number; they
came to view the fepulchre, and came before the time appointed for
their meeting. 2dly, As upon the prefent fuppofition there were
but three women who came firft to the fepulchre, their defign in
coming fo early could be no other than that expreffed by St. Matthew;
for they knew that they themselves were not able to roll away the ftone,
which two of them at least (the two Marys) had feen placed there by
Jofeph of Arimathea*, and which they knew could not be removed
without a great number of hands. Accordingly, " as they drew near,
"they faid among themfelves, who fhall roll away the stone for us
"from the door of the fepulchre ?" Thefe words intimate, that one of
their chief views in coming to fee the fepulchre, was to furvey this
ftone, which clofed up the entrance into it, and to confider whether
they, and the other women who were to meet them there, were by
themselves able to remove it; or whether they must have recourse to
the affiftance of others. For, "Who fhall roll away the tone for
VOL. V.
us ?"

X

* Mark xv. 47.

65

"us?" implies a fenfe of their own inability, and of the neceffity of calling in others; after which the only thing to be confidered was whom and how many this therefore was the point under deliberation when they approached the fepulchre. 2dly, It is alfo plain, from thefe words, that they did not expect to find any body there, and confequently that they knew nothing of the guard which the High-prieft had set to watch the fepulchre; of which had they received any intelligence, they would hardly have ventured to come at all, or would not have deliberated about rolling away the ftone, as the only or greatest difficulty.

§ 6. St. Luke, Chap. xxiv.

"NOW upon the firft day of the week, very early in the morning, they came unto the fepulchre, bringing the spices which they had prepared, and certain others with them: And they found the "ftone rolled away from the fepulchre. And they entered in, and "found not the body of the Lord Jefus. And it came to pafs as they were much perplexed thereabout, behold two men food by them "in fhining garments; and as they were afraid, and bowed down their faces to the earth, they faid unto them, Why feek ye the living among the dead? he is not here, but is rifen. Remember "how he spake unto you, when he was yet in Galilee, faying, The "Son of Man must be delivered into the hands of finful men, and be crucified, and the third day rife again. And they remembered his words, and returned from the fepulchre, and told all these things unto the eleven, and to all the reft. It was Mary Magdalene, and "Joanna, and Mary the mother of James, and other women that "were with them, which told thefe things unto the Apoftles. And "their words feemed to them as idle tales, and they believed them not. Then arose Peter, and ran unto the fepulchre, and ftooping down he beheld the linen clothes laid by themfelves, and departed, wondering in himself at that which was come to pass.”

In this relation of St. Luke's are many particulars that differ greatly from thofe mentioned by the other Evangelifts. For, 1ft, The women entering into the fepulchre fee neither angel nor angels: And, 2dly, Not finding the body of the Lord Jefus, they fall into great perplexity. 3dly, In the midft of this perplexity, there ftood by them two men in fhining garments;" Who, 4thly, fay to them words very different from thofe fpoken by the angel in St. Matthew and St. Mark. 5thly, When thofe women return from the fepulchre, and tell all these things unto the eleven and all the reft, St. Peter is made to be prefent, and upon their report to rife immediately and run to the fepulchre, &c. Thefe marks of difference, one would imagine, were fufficient to keep any one from confounding the flories above-cited of Joanna and St. Peter with thofe concerning the Marys, and that difciple related in the other gofpels; efpecially as they have. been obferved and acknowledged as well by the Chriftian as the infidel; the latter of whom hath produced them to fupport the charge of inconfiftency and contradiction, which he hath endeavoured to fix upon the facred writers; while the former, feduced and dazzled by

fome

fome few points of refemblance, hath agreed with him in allowing thefe different facts to be the fame; but, denying his conclufion, hath laboured to reconcile the inconfiftencies by rules and methods of interpretation, which, as they are strained and unnatural, tend only to discover the greatnefs of his embarraffment. Whereas the true way, in my opinion, of anfwering this charge, is to fhew that it is founded upon a mistake, by fhewing that the Evangelifts relate different, but not inconfiftent, facts; and that, instead of clashing and difagreeing, they mutually confirm, illuftrate, and fupport each other's evidence. This, therefore, I fhall now endeavour to do, by making a few remarks upon the feveral articles above mentioned. I fhall begin with that relating to St. Peter, because the fettling of that will fettle many other points. "Then arofe Peter, and ran "unto the fepulchre, and ftooping down he beheld the linen clothes "laid by themselves, and departed, wondering in himself at that "which was come to pafs." This fact has always been taken to be the fame with that related by St. John, from which however it differs, among other things, in this very material circumftance, viz. That whereas St. John exprefsly fays," that Peter went into the fepulchre, while he [John], who got thither firft, contented himself "with barely ftooping down, and looking into it," St. Luke, in the paffage before us, tells us, "that Peter ftooping down, and looking "in, beheld the linen clothes by themfelves, and departed." The word wapaxulas (ftooping down and looking in), ufed by both Evangelifts, and in the latter applied only to St. Peter, in the former only to St. John, is in his Gospel plainly distinguished from the word

*

bav (entered in), and set in direct oppofition to it; and that not by the force of etymology and conftruction only, but by fome particulars refulting from the actions fignified by thofe two words, which prove them to be diftinct and different from each other. He who went into the fepulchre faw more than he who, ftaying without, only ftooped down and looked in.' Thus Peter and John, when they entered into the fepulchre, faw not only the linen clothes lie, but the napkin that was about his head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself: but when they only ftooped down and looked in, they could fee only the linen clothes, as is evident from the words of St. John. The whole paffage runs thus : 'Peter therefore went forth, and that other difciple, and came to the fepulchre; and the other difciple did out-run Peter, and came first 'to the fepulchre, and he stooping down, and looking in, faw the linen clothes lying, yet went he not in. Then cometh Simon Peter following him, and went into the fepulchre, and feeth the linen 'clothes lie, and the napkin, that was about his head, not lying with 'the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itfelf. Then 'went in alfo that other disciple, and faw,' &c. Now these two actions being by these marks as clearly diftinguished from each other in St. John, as the different places where they were performed can be by the terms entrance and infide of the fepulchre, and as fo diftinguished having been separately performed by that Apoftle, they must alfo neceffarily

X 2

neceffarily be taken for separate and diftinct actions, when related of St. Peter. And if it be reasonable to conclude, from St. John's account, that Peter, when he came with him to the fepulchre, did not ftop at the entrance, ftoop down, and look in, but that he entered into it; it is no lefs reafonable to conclude, from St. Luke's narration, that, when he came at the time mentioned by him, he did not enter in, but, ftooping down, beheld the linen clothes and departed; efpecially if the force of the Greek word μóva be confidered, and the whole paffage rendered, as it ought to have been, beheld the linen clothes only lying, τὰ ἐθόνια κείμενα μόνα. From all which it evidently follows, that the fact here related of St. Peter, and that related of him by St. John, are separate and distinct facts, and not one and the fame, as has been imagined. And as the facts were different, fo did they take their rife from two different occafions; or in other words, as it is evident from all that has been just now faid, that Peter went twice to the fepulchre, fo there are two diftinct reasons for his fo doing affigned in the gofpels of Luke and John, viz. the report of Mary Magdalene, and that of Joanna and the other women. By the former, having been told that the body of Jefus was taken out of the fepulchre, he ran in great hafte to examine into the truth of that account, and in pursuance of this intent entered into the fepulchre, that he might receive a thorough fatisfaction upon that point. In the latter were two additional circumftances of importance fufficient to awaken the curiofity of a lefs zealous difciple than St. Peter, whose affection for his Lord was, like his natural temper, fervent and impetuous. When he heard therefore from Joanna and the other women of a vifion of angels, who had appeared to them at the sepulchre, and informed them that Chrift was rifen, can we wonder at his running thither a fecond time, in hopes of receiving fome confirmation of the truth of that report, which, though treated by the rest of the apostles as an idle tale, he certainly gave credit to, as the whole tenor of this paffage implies? fay, a fecond time; because, had he gone for the first time upon this report of Joanna's, he could have had no inducement to have gone to the fepulchre a fecond time from any thing he could learn from the firft report made by Mary Magdalene, whofe account contained nothing but what was implied in that given by Joanna and the other women. His behaviour alfo upon this occafion, when he only ftooped down and looked into the fepulchre, fo different from the former, when he entered into it, is very rational, and confonant with the purpose of this fecond vifit, which was, to fee if the angels, who had appeared to the women at the fepulchre, were ftill there; this could as well be difcovered by looking, as by going, into the fepulchre, as is plain from the story of Mary Magdalene, who, tooping down and looking in, faw two angels fitting, the one at the head and the other at the feet, where the body of Jefus had lain, as St. John tells us.

Having now, as I hope, proved that this vifit of St. Peter's to the fepulchre, mentioned by St. Luke, must have been his fecond vifit,

I have cleared this paffage from two objections that lay against it; one, that it did not agree with the relation given by St. John; and the other, that it disturbed and confounded the whole order of St. Luke's narration; fo that, notwithstanding this verfe is wanting both in the Greek and Latin copies of Beza, there is no reason for rejecting it, as fome have proposed.

This point being fettled, I beg leave to make a few inferences from it, in order to explain fome paffages in the preceding verfes of this chapter.

First, then, it is plain from this and the ninth verfe, that St. Peter, after he had been with St. John and Mary Magdalene at the fepulchre, was now got together with the other apoftles and difciples, whom, in all probability, he and John had affembled upon the occafion of Mary Magdalene's report. Peter, I fay, and John, had in all probability affembled the other difciples and apoftles, to inform them of what they had heard from Mary Magdalene, and of their having been themselves at the fepulchre to examine into the truth of her report; for it is not to be imagined, that these apostles would not have immediately communicated to the reft an event of so much confequence to them all, as that of the Lord's body being miffing from the fepulchre. And as we now find them gathered together, and Peter with them, it is no unnatural fuppofition that they have been fummoned thither by John and Peter: at leaft their meeting together fo early in the morning is this way accounted for. Here then we fee the reafon of St. Luke's naming Mary Magdalene and the other Mary among those which told these things to the apoftles. For although these two women were not with Joanna and her fet, and confequently could not have joined with them in relating to the apoftles the vifion of the two angels, &c. yet, as the account of their having found the ftone rolled away, and the body of Jefus miffing, had been reported from them by Peter and John to the other apoftles, before the return of Joanna from the fepulchre, St. Luke thought fit to fet them down as evidences of fome of the facts related by him; and, indeed, it was very proper to produce the teftimony of the two Marys concerning the ftone's being rolled away, and the body gone, because they went first to the fepulchre, and firft give an account of those two particulars to the apoftles. I here join the other Mary with Mary Magdalene; for, though I think it is pretty plain, from St. John, that he alone brought this account, yet it is remarkable that in her narration fhe fays, "We know not where they have laid him," fpeaking, as it were, in the name of the other Mary and her own: and doubtlefs fhe did not omit to acquaint them that the other Mary came with her to the fepulchre; fo that this report, though made by Mary Magdalene alone, may fairly be taken for the joint report of the two Marys, and was probably ftyled fo by Peter and John, and therefore reprefented as fuch by St. Luke in the paffage before us.

Secondly, from hence alfo I infer, that the reports of the women were made feparately and at different times. For, if Peter went twice to the fepulchre, there must have been two diftinct reafons for his