12

be offended in me.' Mark fays nothing of this Chapter Vere queftion. Luke relates it in Matthew's manner. John does not mention it; nor was it at all likely he fhould, for in his 3d chapter he introduces John the Baptift, previous to his imprisonment, giving ample teftimony of Jefus and his miffion. After the departure of John's meffengers; Jefus queftioned his audience relative to their opinion of him; and then gives his own-Verily I fay xi, unto you, among them that are born of woman, there hath not rifen 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 What can we understand by the kingdom of Heaven fuffering violence? or how are we to conceive the violent take it by ftorm? The introduction seems to imply that this had been fo but a very fhort time; even if it means from the birth of John, which preceded his own but a few months. Or are we to fuppofe 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 fome other body, would again vifit this world. And here we are told- this is Elias, which was for

come.

to

13

14

Chapter Verfe xi.

15

With this addition--' He that to come.' hath ears to hear, let him ear.' But it is plain, by the 25th verfe, that all who had ears could not hear; or rather as it is meant understand. Jefus fays, 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 verfe ftill more myfterious, is, that it doth not stand in the order here placed, but is preceded by a denunciation of woe to thofe 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). Jefus 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 whomfoever the Son will reveal him.' As we find no anfwer made to this laft affertion, we may fuppofe none of the Scribes or Pharifees were prefent. He concludes, with an invitation to all that are diftreffed, promifing to give them reft, St. Matthew in the next chapter informs us, that Jefus upon the fabbath-day, going with his difciples through the corn, they, being hungry, gathered and eat. The Pharifees, feeing this, upbraided Jefus for permitting them to do fo unlawful an act. To juftify them; he, in reply, quotes the

6

action of David and his men eating the fhew- Chapter Verse bread which was lawful to the priests only. This extenuation (if it be one) applies, in my opinion,

only as a cafe of neceffity*. The 5th, 6th, and
7th verses, are to me obfcure; he fays to the
Pharifees- Have, ye not read in the law how xii.
that on the fabbath-days, the priests in the
temple prophane the fabbath, and are blame-
lefs? But I fay unto you, that in this place is
one greater than the temple, but if ye had
'known what this meaneth, I will haye mercy,
and not facrifice, ye would not have condemn-
ed the guiltlefs. Adding, For the Son of Man
is Lord even of the fabbath-day.' He then
entered their fynagogue, where he found a man
whose hand was withered. The Pharifees asking
him- Is it lawful to heal on the fabbath-days?'
He replied that it was lawful to do good upon
the fabbath-days: asked which of them, having
a sheep fallen into a pit, would not, upon a fab-
bath-day, pull it out; and if a man was not of
more worth than a fheep? 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 fo doing, when we
recollect the declaration he had made previous to

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

6

7

Chapter Verfe this, (Matth. ch. v. v. 17, 18, 19.) That he came not to destroy, but to fulfil the law that it fhould endure to the end of the world: and whoever broke one of the commandments, or taught men to do it, fhould be called, the leaft in the kingdom of Heaven. Yet it now ap pears to the Pharifees, that he not only broke one of them himself, but taught others that they alfo might do fo with impunity. If they mifapprehended him, or were in an error: he, knowing their thoughts, ought rather to have appeafed their refentment 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 ufual ill-luck, applies another prophecy; and then goes on to inform us, that Jefus healed a man poffeffed of a devil, blind and dumb: fo that he both faw and fpake. The fpectators 23 amazed at this miracle, exclaimed-Is not this the fon of David. (Alluding, I apprehend, to the power of cafting out devils poffeffed by Solomon). But when the Pharifees heard of it, (from this, and the 38th verfe, it is plain they 28 were not prefent) they faid-this fellow doth not caft out devils, but by Beelzebub the prince of the devils. This accufation had been brought

xii.

* Vide page 28.

against

against him by the Pharifees upon a former occa- Chapter Verse fion. (Vide Matth. ch. ix. v. 34.) he then made

no reply; but here he urges a very fenfible con-
futation, fhewing the inconfiftency of Satan's being
divided against himself. The Jews had, or pre-
tended to have, a power of cafting out devils,
he therefore asked the Pharifees-by whom do xii.
your children caft them out? and appears to offer
the decifion of this question to them. This fub-
ject produces. a fevere and reiterated denuncia-
tion against those who finned against the Holy
Ghoft. What was this fin against the Holy
Ghoft? This unpardonable crime? has been a
question often afked by the ignorant, and fre-
quently difputed by the learned. Jefus, in this
place, apparently the most proper for it, has not
explained what he meant by Holy Ghoft. It ap-
pears 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 finning against the Holy
Ghoft, which was never to be forgiven, because
he tells them at the fame time- Whofoever

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

27