12

be offended in me.' Mark says nothing of this Chapter Verfe question. Luke relates it in Matthew's manner. John does not mention it; nor was it at all likely he should, for in his 3d chapter he introduces John the Baptift, previous to his imprisonment, giving ample testimony of Jesus and his mission. After the departure of John's messengers; Jefus questioned his audience relative to their opinion of him; and then gives his own-Verily I say xi, unto you, among thein that are born of woman, there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptift. This is followed up with two affertions, neither of which do I understand-And from the days of John the Baptift, until now, the kingdom of Heaven suffereth violence; and the violent take it by force. For all the prophets and the law prophefied until John. And if ye will receive it, this is Elias which was for to come. What can we understand by the kingdom of Heaven suffering violence? or how are we to conceive the violent take it by storm? The introduction seems to imply that this had been so but a very short time; even if it means from the birth of John, which preceded his own but a few months. Or are we to suppose an antecedent state of John's. Pre-existence was held by many in those days: they hoped, and fully expected that the foul of Elias, clothed in some other body, would again visit this world. And here we are told- this is Elias, which was for

to

13

14 Chapter Verfe xi. 15

،

' to come.' With this addition-' He that

hath ears to hear, let him ear. But it is plain, by the 25th verse, that all who had ears could not hear; or rather as it is meant understand. Jesus says, the Father, and he thanks him for it, had hidden those things from the wife and prudent, and revealed them unto babes. What makes the contents of this 25th verse still more mysterious, is, that it doth not stand in the order here placed, but is preceded by a denunciation of woe to those cities in which his mighty works had been performed without effecting their repentance. If this were fo; they had indeed eyes and faw not, ears and heard not, &c. (But more of this when we examine the 13th chapter). Jesus

27 proceeds- All things are delivered unto me of my father: and no man knoweth the Son but 'the Father: neither knoweth any man the Fa ther, fave the Son, and he to whomsoever the

Son will reveal him.' As we find no answer made to this last affertion, we may suppose none of the Scribes or Pharisees were present. He concludes, with an invitation to all that are diftressed, promifing to give them rest, St. Matthew in the next chapter informs us, that Jesus upon the fabbath-day, going with his disciples through the corn, they, being hungry, gathered and eat. The Pharifees, seeing this, upbraided Jefus for permitting them to do so unlawful an act. To justify them; he, in reply, quotes the

action of David and his men eating the shew-Chapter Verse bread which was lawful to the priests only. This extenuation (if it be one) applies, in my opinion, only as a case of neceffity. The 5th, 6th, and 7th verses, are to me obfcure; he says to the Pharifees- Have ye not read in the law how xii. ' that on the fabbath-days, the priests in the

6

temple prophane the fabbath, and are blame' less? But I say unto you, that in this place is one greater than the temple, but if ye had known what this meaneth, I will have mercy,

and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemn'ed the guiltless. Adding, For the Son of Man ' is Lord even of the fabbath-day.' He then entered their synagogue, where he found a man whose hand was withered. The Pharisees asking him Is it lawful to heal on the fabbath-days?" He replied that it was lawful to do good upon the sabbath-days: asked which of them, having a sheep fallen into a pit, would not, upon a sabbath-day, pull it out; and if a man was not of more worth than a sheep? It does not appear that they made any reply: but upon his healing the man, they went out, and held a council against him, how they might destroy him, Nor can we be surprised at their so doing, when we recollect the declaration he had made previous to

* David obtained this shew-bread by an impofition, and for which the priests of Nob were destroyed by Saul.

S

6

7

8

Chapter Verse this, (Matth. ch. v. v. 17, 18, 19.) That he came not to destroy, but to fulfil the law: that it should endure to the end of the world: and whoever broke one of the commandments, or taught men to do it, should be called the least in the kingdom of Heaven*. Yet it now appears to the Pharisees, that he not only broke one of them himself, but taught others that they also might do fo with impunity. If they misapprehended him, or were in an error: he, knowing their thoughts, ought rather to have appeased their resentment by an explanation, than to have fled from it, as we find he did. Soon after this, 16 we are told, he healed multitudes who followed him, and charged them that they should not make him known. Here St. Matthew, with his usual ill-luck, applies another prophecy; and then goes on to inform us, that Jesus healed a man poffefsfed of a devil, blind and dumb: fo that he both faw and spake. The spectators

xii.

23 amazed at this miracle, exclaimed-Is not this the son of David. (Alluding, I apprehend, to the power of casting out devils poffeffed by Solomon). But when the Pharifees heard of it, (from this, and the 38th verse, it is plain they 28 were not present) they faid-this fellow doth not caft out devils, but by Beelzebub the prince of the devils. This accusation had been brought

* Vide page 28.

againft

27

against him by the Pharifees upon a former occa- Chapter Verse sion. (Vide Matth. ch. ix. v. 34.) he then made no reply; but here he urges a very sensible confutation, shewing the inconsistency of Satan's being divided against himself. The Jews had, or pretended to have, a power of cafting out devils, he therefore asked the Pharifees-by whom do xii. your children cast them out? and appears to offer the decision of this question to thein. This subject produces a severe and reiterated denunciation against those who finned against the Holy Ghost. What was this sin against the Holy Ghost? This unpardonable crime? has been a question often asked by the ignorant, and frequently disputed by the learned. Jesus, in this place, apparently the most proper for it, has not explained what he meant by Holy Ghost. It appears only that his auditors the Pharifees, were perverse enough to affign a bad motive for a good action: or that, as he derived the power of doing good, from an evil principal; his doing good actions was only with a view to deceive. But this could not be sinning against the Holy Ghoft, which was never to be forgiven, because he tells them at the fame time-'Whosoever

speaketh a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him.' I am inclined to think, that by the Holy Ghost, is meant the spirit of truth and knowledge, proceeding from, or given by, God alone. Vide Matth. ch. iii. v. 16. Mark

F

32