« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »
Laying these testimonies together, we may fairly come to the conclusion that the south wind's commencing to blow was a natural indication of the approach of the dry, and therefore of the close of the rainy, season in Judæa: as the appearance of the cloud was of the reverse. If so, our Lord intended to reproach his hearers with not being able from the signs of the times, as a case in point, to discover that this was the last and concluding period of his ministry. For there was truly something, and there had been for some time past, in his manner and demeanour, which might have warranted this presumption. His diligence, activity, and earnestness ever since the last feast of Tabernacles, up to the present circuit, were sufficient to have raised the reflection that his time was at hand; that the exigency of the occasion was pressing; that the intermediate period was short, and no part of it was to be idly or unprofitably spent. He delivered more discourses, he spake more parables, he wrought more miracles, and perhaps he visited more places, within the last three months of his ministry, than ever within an equal time before. St. Luke's Gospel, which in less than nine chapters comprised the account of two years and nine months previously, is taken up, for more than fourteen chapters, with the history of these two or three months alone subsequently. Within this period, too, the Seventy had been sent out; that is, the service, before rendered by the Twelve, was increased sixfold by this second mission and our Lord himself was now following in their
sent subject, but also as casting light upon that scene on the lake of Galilee, related John xxi, the time of which was either April or early in May.
The existence of hot winds
in Judæa in the spring, is further implied by the allusions to the heat in harvest; sometimes such as to be fatal. See Prov. x. 5, according to the o'. 2 Kings iv. 18-20. Judith viii. 3.
track, and visiting personally either all or most of the places which had been recently evangelized by them.
The same conclusion, respecting the nature of the present time, is suggested also by the last member of the division, beginning, And why, even of yourselves, do ye not judge of that is just? The reasoning, immediately subjoined, supposes two parties; a creditor who is reclaiming, and a debtor who is withholding, the same just debt. It supposes that the creditor, after trying every other expedient in vain, is having recourse to the law, and bringing his debtor before the judge *: it supposes that the two parties are actually on the way to the court of justice; but not yet arrived there. It supposes, consequently, a remaining interval, but a short and finite one; within which it is still possible for the refractory party to make up the matter, by satisfying the debt of his own accord; and so stopping all further proceedings. But it supposes that, if he persists in his obstinacy to the last, and the case comes before the judge, there will be no longer the means of retreat; the law must take its usual course the judge will deliver him to the exactor; the exactor will consign him to prison; and he will never come out from thence until he have repaid the uttermost farthing.
*The Roman law allowed the plaintiff (especially in cases of debt) to deal in this summary manner with the defendant. Valerius Maximus, ii. i. 5: Sed quo matronale decus verecundiæ munimento tutius esset, in jus vocanti matronam corpus ejus attingere non permiserunt: which of course must have been allowable with the persons of the other sex.
Hence, Horace, Sermonum i. ix. 77. Rapit in jus: clamor
utrinque: Undique concursus. And ii. iii. 72. Cum rapies in jus malis ridentem alienis. Juvenal, x. 87. Et pavidum in jus Cervice obstricta dominum trahat. Ibid. xiii. 108. Trahere immo ultro ac vexare paratus.
Plinius, Panegyricus, 36. §. 3: Dicitur actori atque etiam procuratori tuo: In jus veni: quere ad tribunal. Arrian in Epictetum, i. cap. 29. 154: ax εἴληπταί μού τις τοῦ ἱματίου, καὶ ἔλkel μe eis tǹv ảyopáv' k', T.λ.
Now, all this was applicable to the case of our Lord, and of the Jewish people; the former of whom, upon the strength of sufficient evidence, had long been claiming to be received as their Messiah, and the latter, notwithstanding this evidence, had long been refusing to receive him as such. But it was applicable only on the further supposition that, at this present time, our Lord was making a last and a final appeal to the same people, with a view to their conversion; that the period both of his own ministry, and of their probation, was fast drawing to its close: beyond which should the national impenitence be protracted, they must expect to be given up to the penal consequences of an obstinate unbelief. This part, therefore, leads to the same conclusion as the rest of the chapter before it.
On the incident relating to the Galileans, Luke xiii. 1–9. THE connection of this section with the preceding chapter, which would otherwise be the first thing to require pointing out, has been demonstrated already. The phrase ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ καιρῷ, as equivalent to ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ Kaip, at the self-same season, instead of at the same season, is among the peculiar idioms of St. Luke a; and by its occurrence here ascertains the time of the following account to be directly consecutive upon the preceding. This allusion, then, to the fate of the Galileans took place soon after the previous discourse; and the matter of fact alluded to, if we proceed to examine it, will perhaps be found to conspire with that discourse itself, in leading to the same conclusion, which the consideration of the discourse enabled us to deduce in the preceding Dissertation.
With a view to this examination I am not aware that it makes much difference whether we suppose the Galileans in question to be some of the sect, who are known in contemporary history by their relation to Judas, surnamed the Galilean; or certain of the people of Galilee. The same conclusions would follow in either case; yet the latter, and not the former, is indisputably the more correct opinion.
For first, when a word possesses both a general and proper, and also a particular and improper signification, like this of the Galileans, it is scarcely possible that it should be used aλws, as it is here, except in the for
a Ch. vii. 21. x. 21. xii. 12. xiii. 31. xx. 19. xxiii. 12. xxiv. 13. 33
Those, for whom St. Luke was writing, might very well comprehend what was meant by the people of Galilee; but could not, without some further explanation, understand what was intended by the followers of Judas of Galilee.
Secondly, the name of Galileans, as descriptive of any such sect, occurs no where in the Gospels: the principles of the sect may often be alluded to, but the name of it is regularly kept out of sight. St. Luke in particular suppresses even the name of the Herodians, which neither St. Matthew nor St. Mark does; though the principles of that sect, as the second of the passages cited below serves to demonstrate b, if they were not the same with the principles of the Galileans, bordered very closely upon them.
The truth is, the denomination of Galileans was never the peculiar name of their sect: it may be given, indeed, to their founder, as at Acts v. 37, in reference either to his supposed country, or to the persons of whom his followers, at the time, principally consisted; but as a specific designation for his party, it is as little to be met with in Josephus as in the Gospels. Judas himself was a Gaulanite, ἐκ πόλεως ὄνομα Γάμαλα * c : though he may also be called the Galilean; and if his party had any distinctive appellation, it was that of the Zealots or Sicarii. As such they are enumerated by Josephus, in their proper place, among the other sects of the Jews d. But even the Zealots were a
* Golan in Bashan, mentioned Joshua xx. 8, gave name in after time to the district of Gaulanitis, or Batanea, of Josephus.
b Luke vi. II. XX. 20. viii. 1. xvii. 8.
For the site of Gamala in lower
e Ant. xviii. i. 1. Cf. ibid. 6. xx. v. 2. Bell. ii. d Ant. xviii. i. 1—6. Bell. ii. viii. 1-14. vii. viii. 1.