Lu. xxii. 60. dently affirmed, saying, Of a truth this fellow also was Jerusalem. with him, for he is a Galilean". And Peter said, Man, I know not what thou sayest. Mar. xiv.70. for thou art a Galilean: and thy speech agreeth thereto, 74. Then began he to curse and to swear, saying, I know Mar.xiv.71. I know not this man of whom ye speak. Lu. xxii. 60. And immediately while he yet spake, the cock crew; And the Lord turned, and looked upon Peter; and Mar. xiv.72. Before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice. Mt.xxvi.75. he went out and wept bitterly. MATT. XXVI. part of ver. 73, 74, 75. 73 And after a while came unto him they that stood by, and said to Peter 74 -And immediately the cock crew 75 And Peter remembered the word of Jesus, which said unto him, Before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice. MARK XIV. part of ver. 70, 71, 72. 70 And a little after-Surely thou art one of them- 72-And Peter called to mind the word which Jesus said 9 Pfeiffer, in the last treatise of his Dubia Vexata, endeavours to prove that the common dialect, both of Galilee and Judea, was not Hebrew, but Syro-Chaldaic, or Aramaic, mixed with Greek, and that they differed only in accent and pronunciation. The learned men, of both countries, understood and conversed in pure Hebrew. The Galilean dialect consisted in a corrupt and confused pronunciation of the common Syro-Chaldaic; and this dialect was the vernacular language of the Apostle. According to Lightfoot, y for (which change indeed is frequent in the Aramaic dialect, and by no means peculiar to the Galilean,) for 1, n for 7, and they also frequently changed the gutturals. Among other instances of the effects of these changes, he mentions the following amusing circumstance:-A certain woman intended to say to the judge, My Lord, I had a picture, which they stole, and it was so great, that if you had been placed in it, your feet would not have touched the ground. But her words, from the dialect she used, admitted this interpretation-Sir Slave, I had a beam, and they stole thee away; and it was so great, that if they bad hung thee on it, thy feet would not have touched the ground. Schoetgen (a), among others, mentions, Brescith Rabba, sect. xxvi. fol. 26. 3. xx unb paing abban In Galilæa serpentem,' qui alias n dicitur, vocant " ut pro usurpat &. Horne and Pfeiffer, as well as the two last mentioned authorities, have collected similar instances. (a) Schoetgen, vol. i, p. 235. Mark Xv. 1. SECTION VIII. Christ is taken before the Sanhedrim, and condemned. MATT. xxvii. 1. MARK XV. part of ver. 1. LUKE Xxii. 66. to the end. And straightway in the morning, Lu.xxii. 66, as soon as it was day, Mark xv. 1. the Chief Priests held a consultation with the elders Mark xv. .1. and the Scribes, and the whole council, Mat.xxvii.1. [and] took counsel against Jesus to put him to death. Lu.xxii. 66. 67. saying, Art thou the Christ? tell us. And he said unto 68. 69. 70. 71. Mat.xxvii.3. And if I also ask you, you will not answer me, nor let me go. Hereafter shall the Son of Man sit on the right hand of Then said they all, Art thou then the Son of God? And they said, What need we any further witness? for MATT. XXVii. part of ver. 1. 1 When the morning was come, all the Chief Priests and elders LUKE Xxii. part of ver. 66. 66 the elders of the people, and the Chief Priests, and the Scribes came together SECTION IX. Judas declares the Innocence of Christ". MATT. XXVii. 3-10. Then Judas, which had betrayed him, when he saw 4. Saying, I have sinned, in that I have betrayed the in- 5. And he cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, 10 I am induced to place this section here, because it does not The account of the death of Judas is attended with some difficulty. The manner in which Weston reconciles St. Matthew and St. Luke, seems to be the most preferable. St. Matthew says, aýykaro, "he hanged himself," and St. Luke that he πρηvǹs yεvóμevoç, falling headlong, as we have translated it, Jerusalem. Mt.xxvii.6. 7. 8. 9. And the Chief Priests took the silver pieces, and said, Jerusalem. It is not lawful for to put them into the treasury, because it is the price of blood. And they took counsel, and bought with them the potter's field, to bury strangers in. Wherefore that field was called, The field of blood, unto this day. Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy 10. And gave them for the potter's field, as the Lord ap- (Acts i. 18.) burst asunder in the midst, and his bowels gushed. 12 The words quoted bere are not in the prophet Jeremiah, It was an ancient custom among the Jews, says Lightfoot, to divide the Old Testament into three parts; the first, beginning with the law, is called the Law: the second, beginning with the Psalms,,was called the Psalms; the third, beginning with the prophet in question, was called Jeremiah: thus, then, the writings of Zechariah and the other prophets being included in that division that began with Jeremiah, all quotations from it would go under the name of this prophet. If this be admitted, it solves the difficulty at once. Lightfoot quotes Bava Bathra, and Rabbi David Kimchi's preface to the prophet Jeremiah, as his authorities; and insists that the word Jeremiah is perfectly correct, as standing at the head of that division from which the evangelist quoted, and which gave its denomi- nation to all the rest (a.) (a) Vide Dr. A. Clarke's Comment. in loc. Lightfoot's Harmony, Pitman's 8vo. edit. vol. ii. p. 157, 158. and the note on the Prophecies of Zechariah, in the second volume of the Arrangement of the Old Tes tament. Lu. xxiii. 1. SECTION X. Christ is accused before Pilate, and is by Him also MATT. xxvii. 2. and 11-14. MARK XV. 1—5. LUKE xxiii. 1-4. JOHN Xviii. 28-38. And the whole multitude of them arose, Mark xv. 1. and bound Jesus, Mat.xxvii.2. And when they had bound him, they led him away Jo. xviii. 28. from Caiaphas, unto the hall of judgment: Mat.xxvii.2. and delivered him unto Pontius Pilate the governor. 29. Pilate then went out unto them, and said, What accu- 31. 30. They answered and said unto him, If he were not a 32. 13 Much discussion has taken place on the question, whether Two kinds of arguments have been used, to prove that the The judge, according to the Roman laws, exerted in criminal The arguments by which the position is defended, that the Jews had not the power of life and death at this time, are thus proposed, and answered by Biscoe (a). 1. There was a Roman law, which states that the municipal magistrate cannot do those things which have more of imperium than of jurisdiction; the municipal magistrates not having it in their power to enforce their orders. Ans. It cannot be proved that this law existed at the time in question and even if it had, there is sufficient grounds for concluding it was confined to the municipes, who were Roman citizens, and therefore to be tried and punished by magistrates of the first rank; and that it did not extend to the provincials, who were less regarded, and left more under the power of their own magistrates. 2. The power of inflicting capital punishments could not be exercised by any magistrate, unless it were given him by some special law or constitution; therefore this power could not be transferable to magistrates who held a delegated jurisdiction. Jerusalem. Lukexxiii.2. And they began to accuse him, saying, We found this Jerusalem. fellow perverting the nation, and forbidding to give tribute to Cesar, saying that he himself is Christ, a king. Ans. Nothing is more certain than that many cities, and some whole countries, had obtained from the people and emperors of Rome, the privilege of being governed by their own laws, and by their own magistrates, in a greater or less degree. The Carthaginians, after the second Punic war, had the power of executing their own laws, even in capital punishments; and many other instances might be enumerated. Why may we not then suppose that the people of Judea were equally favoured? It may indeed be shewn, from many things recorded in history, that the Romans were more peculiarly disposed to be favourable to the Jews. 3. According to the civil law of Rome, the presidents alone possessed the Merum Imperium, or the power of sitting in judgment on, and executing criminals, in those provinces over which they were placed. Answ. This is taking for granted the thing that is questioned. It is acknowledged that the Jewish magistrates had the power of inflicting lesser punishments; but how could this be, if the cognizance of all criminal causes was solely in the president, and not the least part of this power could be delegated? The Jewish magistrates must have received their power to execute these minor punishments either by some special law; or, what is more probable, (as there is no record of such law in their favour,) they, like other nations, were allowed the privilege of their own laws. We now proceed to the arguments from the New Testament. 1. The most plausible of all is, that saying of the Jews to Pilate, It is not lawful for us to put any man to death, (John xviii. 31.) which is represented as an ample acknowledgment from the Jews themselves, that they had not at that time the power of inflicting capital punishments. Ans. The context proves that these words do not imply that the Romans had deprived them of the liberty of judging men by their own law, but shew on the contrary, that they had the option of trying Jesus themselves, or of giving him up to the Roman Governor. For Pilate had only a moment before said, "Take ye him, and judge him according to your law." Their answer is evidently a refusal of the Governor's offer; and if we inter-` pret the words in any other way, we are naturally brought to the conclusion, that Pilate, when he said "Judge him according to your law," spoke in mere mockery, and intended to remind them of their subjection, which is not probable, as he was then called upon to act in his official capacity. Something more therefore must be understood than what is expressed; and nothing I think can be so reasonably supplied to make the sense complete, as that which regards the time in which the conversation took place, namely, the first day of the passover week, and the preparation for the Sabbath-" It is not lawful for us to put any man to death this holy festival." In the same manner it was not lawful for them to go into the judgment-hall (John xviii. 28.) Pilate, who had been long Governor, must have been well acquainted with their customs, and must have perfectly comprehended their meaning. St. Augustine, Cyril, and several other ancient fathers, put the same construction on these words, which agrees exactly with the rule laid down in the Talmud. The Mishna says expressly that capital causes, in which the criminal was condemned, were always to be finished after the trial began, for |