« EdellinenJatka »
them. And it came to pass, as he sat at meat with them, [or as he was sitting down to table with them:] he took bread, and blessed it, and brake unto them. And their eyes were opened, and they knew him. And he vanished out of their sight: [that is, he retired, and went away.] And they said one to another: Did not our hearts burn within us, whilst he talked with us in the way? and whilst he opened to us the scriptures? And they rose up the same hour, and returned to Jerusalem, and found the eleven gathered together, and them that were with them, saying, The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared unto Simon. And they told them what things were done in the way, and how he was known unto them in breaking of bread."
Here ariseth a question, whether these two disciples did set out for Emmaus before the disciples knew of Mary Magdalene's having herself seen Jesus. You say, p. 648, You say, p. 648, It seems that these two had left the city before any of the women came with the news of Christ's personal appearance.' And presently afterwards you say, p. 648, 649, The smallest attention will show, that Cleophas and his companions do not here speak of Mary Magdalene's second information.' Le Clerc likewise says, That these two disciples set out for Emmaus before Jesus had shown himself to Mary Magdalene.' I believe this may be the opinion of many, I also may have said the same myself. But my honoured friend above-mentioned thinks otherwise, as we have seen. · They did,' as he says, make their report to the apostles, before the two went from the rest of the company to Emmaus. No notice is mentioned by the two in discourse with Christ of the woman's having related their interview with Jesus, because it should seem, none of the company believed a word of what the women said,' Mark xvi. 11. Luke xxiv. 11. And none of the evangelists pretend to give an exact detail of all circumstances.' Let us now go over the particulars of ver. 21-24. And beside all this, to day is the third day since these things were done. Yea, and certain women also of our company made us astonished, who were early at the sepulchre. And when they found not his body, they came, saying, That they had also seen a vision of angels, who said that he was alive." It follows in the same discourse of the two disciples, ver. 24. "And certain of them which were with us went to the sepulchre, and found it even as the women had said. But him they saw not." Referring to what St. John writes of Peter and John visiting the sepulchre, chap. xx. 3-10: and to what St. Luke writes of Peter, chap. xxiv. 12.
It might be expected that now, after this, these two disciples should also distinctly mention the second report of Mary Magdalene, related by St. John xx. 11-18, provided that report had been made to the apostles before the two set out for Emmaus. This omission is accounted for by my friend in the manner above mentioned: they take no notice of this, because they paid little regard to it. And does not this appear also in what the eleven say to these two when they came to them, and told them what they had seen? Luke xxiv. 34. " They said to them: The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared unto Simon." They say nothing of Mary Magdalene, though she certainly had been with them before that time, and had made her second report to them, "that she had seen the Lord, and that he had said these things unto her," John xx. 18.
Let me now cite some observations of your own, p. 652. As soon as Jesus departed, the two disciples made all the haste they could to Jerusalem, that they might have the pleasure of acquainting them with the agreeable news. But they were in some measure prevented: for immediately on their arrival, the eleven, with the women, accosted them, giving them the news of their Master's resurrection. "And they rose up at the same hour and returned to Jeru'salem, and found the eleven gathered together, and them that were with them, saying: The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared unto Simon." The apostles had given little credit to the ⚫ reports of the women, supposing they were occasioned more by imagination than reality but when a person of Simon's capacity and gravity declared that he had seen the Lord, they began to think that he was risen indeed. Their belief therefore was not a little confirmed by the arrival of these two disciples, who declared that the Lord had appeared to them also. Ver. 35. "And they told what things were done in the way, and how he was known unto them in breaking of bread," that is, by his prayer before meat. Mark however represents the reception which their report met with somewhat differently: ch. xvi. 12. " After that he appeared in • another form," εv εtega μоpPn. i. e. in another dress, the dress of a traveller, "unto two of
⚫ Cum vero duo ex discipulis Jesu, mane ejusdem diei, antequam se Mariæ Magdalenæ stitisset Jesus, profecti essent Jerosolyma Emmaüntem. Cleric. Harm. p. 487.
them, as they walked and went into the country. Ver. 13. And they went and told it unto the residue: neither believed they them." But there is no inconsistency between the evangelists for though the greatest part of the apostles believed that Jesus was risen, as Luke affirms; some who had not given credit either to the women or to Simon, continued obstinately to disbelieve, in spite of all that these two disciples or the rest could say.'
I shall add somewhat farther from your Preliminary Observations, p. 39, where you say, The male disciples being the witnesses, upon whose testimony the world was to believe that our Lord arose from the dead, it concerned mankind more to be informed of his appearances to them, than to be made acquainted with his appearances to the women. Luke knew this. And therefore, while he has related the appearances to the male disciples he has omitted the appearances to the women altogether. It seems, the brevity which he studied did not permit that both should be told. In like manner the apostle Paul, summing up the evidence of our • Lord's resurrection, takes no notice of his appearances to the women, because they were not to be the witnesses of this matter to the world.' 1 Cor. xv. 1-9.
And here from your observations just mentioned, ariseth another consideration. For you say, that St. Luke has omitted Christ's appearances to the women altogether.' If that be so, we are not to expect, that these two should take any notice of Mary Magdalene's second report, though it had been made to the apostles, before they set out from Jerusalem. St. Luke's words are these: ch. xxiv. 1-11. "Now upon the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they [that is, the women who had come with Jesus from Galilee, ch. xxiii. 55.] came unto the sepulchre, bringing the spices, which they had prepared, and certain others with them. And they found the stone rolled away from the sepulchre. And they entered in, and found not the body of the Lord Jesus. And it came to pass, as they were much perplexed thereabout, behold, two men stood by them in shining garments. And as they were afraid, and bowed down their faces to the earth, they said unto them: Why seek ye the living among the dead? He is not here, but is risen. Remember, how he spake unto you, when he was yet in Galilee, saying: The Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again. And they remembered his words. And returned from the sepulchre, and told all these things to the eleven, and to all the rest. It was Mary Magdalene, and Joanna, and Mary the mother of James, and other women that were with them, who told these things unto the apostles. And their words seemed to them as idle tales, and they believed them not." That is the account, which St. Luke has given of the testimony of the women to the resurrection of Jesus. And it is very observable. I make no question, that herein is included Mary Magdalene's second report to the apostles, mentioned by St. John xx. 18. And it confirms the supposition, before-mentioned, that Mary Magdalene was not then alone, but that all the other women were then with her, though they are not mentioned by St. John.
These observations are sufficient to account for the two disciples not mentioning distinctly the report of Mary Magdalene, though they did not set out from Jerusalem until after it had been made to the apostles.
But there are other considerations, which may support the same persuasion. It is confirmed by the order of narration in St. Mark's gospel, ch. xvi. 9. "Now when Jesus was risen early, the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven dæmons." Ver. 10. "And she went, and told them that had been with him, as they mourned and wept." This is what St. John says, ch. xx. 18. "Mary Magdalene came, and told the disciples, that she had seen the Lord, and that he had spoken these things unto her." It follows in Mark xvi. 11. "And they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had been seen of her, believed not." Then, at ver. 12. "After that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as they walked, and went into the country." This is full proof, that these two did not set out for Emmaus, till after that Mary Magdalene had told the disciples, "she had seen the Lord."
And, I pray, what is the meaning of his appearing to them in another form? You say, in another dress, that of a traveller. Which I think does not give the true meaning of the phrase. Grotius b says, in another dress, that is, different from what had been used by him.' And Dr. uti solebat. Ideo wapoxov habitantem in proximo, putabant. Grot, in Marc. xvi. 12.
Μετα δε ταυτα δυσιν εξ αυτών περιπατωσιν εφανερώθη εν μορφή, πορευομενοις εις αγρόν.
Bre?? Prep qoppy, in aliá effigie.] Habitu alio, quam quo,
Doddridge, to the same purpose: in a different habit from what he ordinarily wore.' neither does that, as I apprehend, fully represent the design and meaning of the Evangelist's expression. I think, he refers to some appearance of Christ, which had been made before that now made to these two. What can that be, but "the appearance to Mary Magdalene," mentioned by himself, ver. 9, 10? This seems to me to be the plain and evident meaning of St. Mark. And it fully shows, that Mary's second report to the apostles had been made, before these two set out from Jerusalem to go to Emmaus.
There is still another argument of great force, which offers to our consideration. These two disciples did not set out till eleven or twelve o'clock according to our computation. Emmaus was little more than two hours walk, if at all. They arrived at the village about three in the afternoon, or sooner, Luke xxiv. 29. As they were engaged in discourse, during a great part of the journey; we will suppose, that they made three hours of it. Consequently, they set out at twelve, or not much sooner. But before that, Mary had made her second report to the disciples, that she had seen the Lord." And these two were with the disciples when that report was made. Mary and the other women went early to the sepulchre. They got to the sepulchre by the rising of the sun. When Mary came first to the apostles, as is related John xx. 1, 2, it could not be more than six o'clock, or thereabout. After which Peter and John went in great haste to the sepulchre, and Mary with them, or after them, as fast as she could. Peter and John did not stay long at the sepulchre. But having taken a view of the state of things there," they went away again to their own home," John xx. 10. Soon after these two apostles were gone away, the Lord appeared to Mary Magdalene, and presently after that, to all the other women, who had gone up early in the morning with the spices. Then Mary and the rest came down to the apostles, and let them know that they had seen the Lord," and they delivered to them the message, with which they had been entrusted, together with all the circumstances of his appearing to them. It could not be then more than seven or eight or nine in the forenoon. This is much confirmed by the circumstance observed by my friend from Matt. xxviii. 11. "Now when they [the women] were going, behold, some of the watch came into the city, and showed unto the chief priests all the things that were done." It may be well supposed, that this part of the watch, or guard, came to the priests as soon as they could have access unto them in a body, when met together. Which may be reckoned between seven and eight, or at the farthest, between eight and nine in the morning. At that time Mary Magdalene, and the women with her, came down to the disciples, and made their report to them, that "they had seen the Lord."
There can then no longer be any question made, but that the two disciples were acquainted with that report of Mary Magdalene, and the rest of the women, before they set out for Emmaus.
St. Luke says, ch. xxiv. 33-36. "And they rose up the same hour, and returned to Jerusalem, and found the eleven gathered together, and them that were with them. Saying, the Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared unto Simon. And they told what things were done in the way, and how he was known of them in breaking of bread. And as they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and saith unto them: Peace be unto you."
We should now observe the time, when these two disciples arrived at Jerusalem, and returned to the company of the disciples, whom they had left to go to Emmaus.
When they arrived at that village, and entreated Jesus "to abide with them, they said: It is toward evening, and the day is far spent," or has already begun to decline: or pos εcπεpay ε51, οτι προς εσπέραν εξί, nai nɛndinev nuɛpa, ver. 29. It was past noon, and might be near our three after noon. As they were sitting down to eat, looking more directly at Jesus, than they had yet done, they knew him. Our Lord thereupon retired, and they hastened to Jerusalem. Emmaus was about a two hours walk from Jerusalem. They might get thither about five after noon, more than an hour before sun-set. And, probably, did so. Soon after our Lord came in. He might have been there before them. But he was willing, that the disciples, and they that were with them, should be prepared for his appearing among them, by the testimony of these two, added to the testimonies of Peter, and the women, who had already seen him.
We proceed in Luke xxiv. 36. "And as they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the midst, and saith: Peace be unto you." Ver. 37. "But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed, that they had seen a spirit. [Which shows, that there were still several, who did not believe
him to be risen from the dead.] Ver. 38. " And he said unto them: Why are ye troubled? And why do thoughts arise in your hearts?" Ver. 39. "Behold my hands, and my feet, that it is I myself. Handle me, and see. For a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have." Ver. 40." And when he had thus spoken, he showed them his hands and his feet." Ver. 41. "And while they yet believed not for joy, and wondered; he said unto them: Have ye here any meat?" Ver. 42. "And they gave him a piece of a broiled fish, and of an honeycomb.' Ver. 43. "And he took it, and did eat before them."
The words, last quoted, "Have ye here any meat, &c." deserve notice. They should be compared with Mark xvi. 14. Afterwards he appeared to the eleven, as they sat at meat. Ύςερον, ανακειμένοις αυτοις τοις ένδεκα εφανερώθη. The eleven were yet at table, or were not yet risen up from their places. There is no improbability in this, considering the transactions of the day, and the great concern they had been in for their Lord, and their apprehensions from the Jews. It might well happen, that they had not dined before five after noon. Coming in, then, at that time, when their repast was just over, and finished, or almost finished, he might well put that question: "Have ye here any meat? And they gave him a piece of a broiled fish, and of an honeycomb.
Upon this you say, p. 654. He tarried so long with them, that they had time to make ready some fish for supper, which he took a share of.' But the other way of accounting for that question, appears to me preferable. "Have ye here any meat?" ExeTI TI Epwoμov evlade is properly said to persons now risen, or just rising from table. And they gave it him presently. He does not desire them to prepare, or make ready for him. But he asks, if they had any meat at hand, or any thing left. Beza disputes this interpretation of the word. But he acknowledgeth that it is the rendering both of the Vulgate, and of Erasmus. To me it appears very right. And Beza's objections against it are frivolous and ill grounded.
We proceed. Luke xxiv. 44. "And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was with you, that all things must be fulfilled which are written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms concerning me." Ver. 45. "Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the Scriptures." Ver. 46. "And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day." Ver. 47. "And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem." Ver. 48. "And ye are witnesses of these things." Ver. 49. And behold I send the promise of my Father upon you. But tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, till ye be endowed with power from on high."
Of this appearance of our Lord to the disciples, St. John writes to this purpose, ch. xx. 19-23.Then the same day, at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut, where the disciples were assembled, for fear of the Jews, came Jesus, and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. And when he had so said, he showed them his hands and his side. Then were the disciples glad when they saw the Lord. Then said Jesus unto them again, Peace be unto you. As my Father hath sent me, so send I you. And when he had said this, he breathed upon them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost. Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them: and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained."
Thus concluded the first day of the week, the day on which Jesus rose from the dead. Says St. John, "Then, the same day at evening, being the first day of the week-came Jesus, and stood in the midst." The first evening, according to Jewish computation, began at three after noon, and ended at six after noon, or sun-setting. Of this use of the word, we have divers examples in the New Testament. In the history of the miracle of the five thousand fed with five loaves, St. Matthew says, ch. xiv. 15. " And when it was evening, his disciples came to him, saying, This is a desert place, and the time is now past." It was then about three after noon. So likewise Matt. xxvii. 57." When the even was come, there came a rich man of Arimathea, named Joseph, who also himself was a disciple." Every one knows that Jesus expired at three after noon. At that time, called here the evening, came Joseph to take care of the body of Jesus. And when St. John in this text says, "the same day at evening, being the first day of
■ 'Postremo vero unâ sedentibus ipsis undecim.' [recumbentibus ipsis undecim. Vulg.] id est, cum unâ domi essent.
Vulg. et Erasmus de accubitu interpretantur, &c. Bez. ad
the week, came Jesus:" he must be understood to say that Jesus came to the disciples, in that space of time, between three after noon and sun-setting, or six after noon. And from the history of the two disciples who had been at Emmaus [as related Luke xxiv.] who had arrived just before Jesus came in, we have argued, that Jesus came in at five after noon, or possibly somewhat sooner, when there was yet an hour's day-light. And I believe, that upon due consideration, it will be thought to be a strange conceit, which has been admitted by some christian commentators, that Jesus did not now appear to the disciples till after sun-setting, when it was night, and even late in the night: which is, really, to expose this history to the scoffs of infidels. St. John says, "the doors were shut," but he does not say that they were shut because it was dark but for fear of the Jews:" which they may have been all that day.*
I have still one observation more to mention; which is intended farther to confirm the supposition, that the two did not leave the other disciples, nor set out for Emmaus, till after the report made by Mary Magdalene, and the other women with her, "that they had seen the Lord:" and also to explain more distinctly those words of the two disciples to Jesus. Luke xxiv. 22, 23. Yea, and certain women also of our company made us astonished, which were early at the sepulchre. And when they found not his body, they came, saying, That they had also seen a vision of angels, which said, that he was alive.'
I think that these words refer to, and include the second report of Mary Magdalene, and the women with her, which is recorded in John xx. 18. " Mary Magdalene came and told the disciples that she had seen the Lord, and that he had spoken these things unto her.”
What I would now propose to consideration, is this: neither Mary Magdalene, nor any other of the women, saw any angel when they first went up to the sepulchre. They did not see any angel till some time afterwards, that is, not till after they had been down with the apostles, and returned back to the sepulchre. Nor did John and Peter see any angel when they went up to verify the truth of what the women had said to them. The appearance of the angels was not till after Mary Magdalene was returned to the sepulchre from the apostles: therefore the two disciples, in the words above quoted from Luke xxiv. 22, 23. refer to the second report or testimony of Mary Magdalene, and the women with her.
Let us observe the history, as it lies in St. John's gospel, xx. 1, 2. "The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre. Then she runneth, and cometh to Simon Peter, and to the other disciple, whom Jesus loved, and saith unto them: They have taken away the Lord out of the sepulchre, and we know not where they have laid him." She says not a word of the appearance of angels, or any information received from them. Therefore no such thing had happened.
It follows, ver. 3—10. “Peter therefore went forth, and that other disciple, and came to the sepulchre. So they ran both together, and the other disciple did outrun Peter, and came first to the sepulchre. And he stooping down, and looking in, saw the linen clothes lying. Yet went he not in. Then cometh Simon Peter following him, and went into the sepulchre, and seeth 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 itself. Then went in also that other disciple, which came first to the sepulchre, and he saw, and believed, [that is, finding nothing in the sepulchre but the clothes, he believed that the body was taken away as Mary Magdalene had said:] For as yet they knew not the scripture: That he must rise again from the dead. Then the disciples went away again to their own home." Therefore neither did these apostles see any angels at the sepulchre, or near it. For no such thing is here mentioned or hinted. It is also confirmed by St. Luke's account of the same visit, or journey to the sepulchre, ch. xxiv. 12. "Then arose Peter, and came unto the sepulchre, and stooping down, he beheld the linen clothes laid by themselves, and departed, wondering in himself at that which was come to pass." He seeth not any angels. Nor does he receive any information from angels. He only sees, and views the sepulchre, and observes, that the body was gone, and the clothes were left lying by themselves. Nor could he forbear to wonder greatly.
We are next to attend to what follows the quotation before made from John xx. where at
• What is above said, is very similar to some observations of the author of the Remarks upon Dr. Ward's Dissertations,
p. 285, &c. to whom therefore I refer you: for there the same point is handled more at large.