private enmity." These and such like adagial and hyperbolical formulas, he remarks, are not, in interpretation, to be too much pressed. But we prefer the view of the passage we have taken in vol. i. pp. 63-6, and pp. 208-9, ante.

CHAPTER VII.

66

"And stood at his feet behind him weeping."-Ver. 38. FOR want of proper discrimination and description, in respect to the manner in which the Orientals recline at table, several passages in the gospels are not merely injured as to their true sense, but appear as nonsense, in our English translation. So in the passage under consideration : "A woman in the city, who was a sinner, when she knew that Jesus sat at meat in the Pharisee's house, brought an alabaster box of ointment, and stood at his feet, BEHIND him, weeping and began to wash his feet with tears, and did wipe them with the hairs of ber head; and kissed his feet, and anointed them with the ointment." Now, surely, when a person SITS at meat, according to those ideas which naturally suggest themselves to an English reader of the passage, his feet, beside being on the floor under the table, are BEFORE him, not BEHIND him and the impossibility of any one STANDING AT his feet behind him-standing, and while standing, kissing his feet, wiping them, etc. is glaring. But a knowledge of their reclining attitude at table relieves us from all these difficulties. Around the table are placed couches or beds, on which the persons recline on their left elbow, the right hand being free for use. In this posture their feet are of course directed outward, and therefore more exposed to salutation, or

:

any other treatment, from one standing behind them. A knowledge of this circumstance will also illustrate the meaning of John xii. 3; ch. xiii. 5, 23, etc.

"Wherefore I say unto thee, her sins, which are many, are forgiven for she loved much."-Ver. 47.

This love or gratitude, says Markland, could not be the cause, but was the effect or consequence, of her forgiveness: the cause was her faith (ver. 50); so that the word hoti seems to be out of its proper place, and the argument inverted. It should be, Because her sins, which were many, are forgiven, she hath loved much, or showed much love and charity towards me. This way of writing, he adds, is frequently used in the evangelists, and elsewhere in the Scriptures. So John xii. 39: "For this reason they could not believe, because Esaias in another place said," etc. instead of, "For this reason, because they could not (or did not) believe, Esaias," etc. And so again, in John viii. 47: "For this reason ye do not hear, because ye are not of God;" instead of, "For this reason, because ye do not hear, ye are not of God." There are many instances of this in the Old Testament. See 1 Sam. ii. 25; Exod. xvi. 26, in the LXX.

CHAPTER XI.

"But rather give alms of such things as ye have; and, behold, all things are clean unto you."-Ver. 41.

THIS passage is very obscure, and we have found no writer who succeeds in removing the difficulties which encumber it. Mr. John Wesley seems to have caught its true sense, however. The following is his translation of this and the preceding verse, with his remark upon them :

"Ye unthinking men, did not he that made the

outside, make the inside also? But give what is in them in alms, and behold all things are clean to you." As if he had said, By acts directly contrary to rapine and wickedness, show that your hearts are cleansed, and these outward washings are needless. This interpretation, it will be seen, restricts the sense of all things, in the propriety of which Rosenmüller acquiesces, remarking that it ought not, in interpretation, to be extended beyond what the intent of the speaker and the connection of the sentence require; as if all things were lawful to him who give alms.

CHAPTER XX.

'By what authority doest thou these things? or who is he that gave thee this authority? And he answered and said unto them, I will also ask you one thing; and answer me: The baptism of John, was it from heaven, or of men ?.... And they answered that they could not tell whence it was. And Jesus said unto them, Neither tell I you by what authority I do these things.”— Ver. 2-8.

66

They an

neither,"

To the question proposed by the priests and scribes Jesus replies by another question, “The baptism of John, was it from heaven, or of men ?" swered they could not tell whence it was; says Jesus, "tell I you by what authority I do these things." The answer was a satisfactory one, on the chief priests' own principle. Observe how the case stands: the chief priests and scribes came to him as he was teaching in the temple." They were, without question, a deputation from the Sanhedrim, who had, or were then universally allowed to have, the right of enquiring into the credentials of all who pretended to come from God-to try the spirits of the prophets. Here then was the dilemma. Jesus professed to submit to the established authority, and yet it was too early to own his Messiahship.

66

What was to be done? Why, with an address and presence of mind altogether divine, he asked them about the authority of John, who professed to be a messenger from God, and His forerunner: but they, not owning his authority, and yet, for fear of the people, not daring expressly to disclaim it, answered, they could not tell whence his authority was.” This was the point Jesus wished for; and we are to suppose Him answering them in this convincing manner: "If you come from the Sanhedrim, whose authority I acknowledge, to inquire into my mission, there is no necessity, in the principles of the Sanhedrim itself, for that body to come to a determination on the point, for the mission of John, who was before me, is a question still undetermined by it. Why then should it determine mine? John professed himself to be my forerunner, and order and equity demand that the Sanhedrim should first decide upon his pretensions. I, therefore, without denying the authority of the Sanhedrim, decline telling it by what authority I do these things."

THE GOSPEL OF JOHN.

IT is evident that John had seen the other Gospels before he wrote his own, and that he carefully omits those transactions and discourses which he found therein recorded; or that, if he is obliged to notice them, for the purposes of connection or otherwise, it is done in a cursory manner. In chap. xx. 31, he expressly states the design of his own gospel. 66 These are written that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that, believing, ye might have life through his name." Hence, he has, especially, as in the opening, recorded the divine character and august majesty of the Saviour, and those discourses in which He spake of Himself, of his divine mission, and of the work committed to Him by the Father; subjects rarely discussed by the other evangelists, and nowhere so evidently, clearly, and systematically treated of as in this gospel. In the other gospels, we hear Christ speaking like an inspired person, but as a man; in this gospel, as the Son of God—the Messiah himself. The other evangelists have, indeed, delivered that fundamental doctrine which respects his divinity and messiahship, but only on occasions supplied by other subjects, and have only sometimes touched upon it. John, however, has professedly and systematically explained it: a method most efficacious for both instruction and persuasion.