that the consent of the civil Governor was judged necessary to sanction the decrees of the Sanhedrim in capital cases, and what is stated on this occasion by Josephus, explains the course of proceeding which had been previously adopted at the condemnation of our Saviour, who after he had been led to Caiaphas, and condemned for blasphemy by the High Priest, was conducted to Pilate. It is to be observed that there was an appeal from the lesser council of seven, in other cities, to the supreme council of seventy, at Jerusalem, which declared the law against those who were guilty of capital offences, but the power of life and death was taken away from them; which circumstance seems to throw some light upon our Saviour's words, "It cannot be, that a prophet perish out "of Jerusalem," making them to convey, not only a reference to the callous and vindictive spirit of the Jews, but an allusion to the laws by which they were constrained. The conduct of the Jews towards James, called "the Just," with relation, probably, to the righteousness of the law, is said to have been regarded by the miserable people as one cause of the condemnation with which * Luke xiii. 33. they were visited; and this guilty conviction might have been enforced by the declaration of Christ with respect to their punishment for the righteous blood which they had before shed. Theophylact refers to a passage in Josephus to this effect, as relating that the wrath of God was kindled on account of this murder. The passage is not to be found in the present copies of the historian, though it is observed that the conduct of Ananus was condemned by the honest and conscientious part of the city, and made a subject of complaint to Agrippa and Albinus*. It may be worth remarking, that we learn from a fragment of Hegesippus †, that the Ebionites interpreted a prophecy of Isaiah as foretelling that very murder, and its consequent punishment, representing the prophecy, however, to contain more than the sacred text authorizes, citing it thus: “Let "us take away the Just One, for it is un 66 profitable to us, and therefore say ye to "the righteous, that it shall be well with "them, for they shall eat the fruit of their doings." Or as others render the pas 66 Whiston's 1st Dissert. on Joseph. lib. i. § 15. it デビュ Let us take away the Just One, for he is unprofitable to us, therefore shall they eat the fruit of their own ways." Josephus then, it may be presumed, was sensible that the guilt of the Jews was aggravated by their conduct in this instance, as without doubt it was in that greater and unexampled work of depravity, the crucifixion of Christ, though he has not expressly specified the causes of God's anger. among Josephus speaks of Felix as having been the Governor of Judea, and of Portius Festus having succeeded him; in a manner which concurs with the representations of Sacred History, and circumstances stated by the Evangelical writers *. He relates also, that Felix had procured the death of Jonathan the High Priest, who had recommended him to be procurator of Judea, but who had excited the displeasure of Felix, by his admonition to him, to correct his administration ; a particular proof of what Tacitus affirms, that he did not scruple to commit any kind of injustice. Josephus remarks that the Casarean Jews followed hir ith complaints to * Antiq. lib. xx. c. 6, + Antiq. lib. xx. c. 7. Rome, and that he narrowly escaped their resentment, which tends to confirm the probability of the account of St. Luke, that Felix hoped that money should be given to him, of St. Paul that he might loose him, and it is to be remembered that Paul had told Felix that he had come to bring alms and offerings to his nation *. Josephus represents Felix to have seduced Drusilla from her former husband and religion, she having been the wife of Azizus, king of Emesat, particulars confirmed by Tacitus, excepting that the Roman historian represents Drusilla as the grand-daughter of Antony and Cleopatra, whereas she was the sister of Agrippa, and Tacitus probably confounded her with another wife of Felix, who had been three times married. From all that we collect from the Heathen historians, we are led to remark with what peculiar boldness St. Paul must have reasoned before such a judge, concerning righteousness, tem * Acts xxiv. 17. Antiq. lib. xx. c. 7. p. 895. + Antiq. lib. xx. c. 6. p. 890. and Tacit. Hist. lib. v. c. 9. Annal. lib. xii. c. 54. Gen. xlix. 10. Suet. Claud. c. 28. Lardner, Part I. b. i. c. 1. p. 28. Edit. Kippis, 1788. perance, and judgment to come, and we hear without surprise, that Felix trembled. Josephus shews his belief in the immortality of the soul, and professes to have dissuaded his companions after the siege of Jotapata from destroying themselves and killing him, by alleging arguments very similar, and enforced by similar figures, to those which are employed by St. Paul: the following passage is remarkable. "All have "mortal bodies formed of corruptible mat 66 ter, but the soul is immortal, being a por"tion of the divinity inhabiting our bodies. "What, know ye not that they who depart "out of life according to the laws of nature, "and pay to God the debt which he claims, "when it is his will that we should be com 66 posed to sleep, will obtain eternal praise, "and double houses and generations, and "that pure and obedient souls remain about "to receive a most holy place in hea 66 66 ven, for whence, after the revolution of ages, they shall be again appointed to in"habit new bodies; but that the souls of "those who have madly laid violent hands upon themselves, shall be consigned to the "darkest grave or hell* ?" * De Bell. Jud, lib. iii, c. 7. p. 1144. |