Two argumeots may be mentioned in support of tbe above explanation. — One is tbe great improbability tbat our Lord's enemies, having taken Him prisoner, would wait until it was morning before tbey examined Him. On the contrary it is
Slain, from Matthew and Mark, that Jesus was taken before aiaphas as soon as He was apprehended. — The other argument is the great improbability, that the men who held Jesus would have mocked and insulted Him as they did, if He had not been already examined, and condemned.
We must imderstand then, that our Lord was twice examined before the chief priests and elders, and that the examination mentioned by St. Luke, is the second of the two, and answers to the morning ** consultation," mentioned by St. Mark. (Mark XV. 1.) — I am aware that Poole, Doddridge, and Alford, maintain that there was only one examination before the priests. But their reasoning does not satisfy me.
Home remarks, in his Introduction to Scripture, " According to the Talmud, capital causes were prohibited from being heard in the night, as also was the institution of an examination, pro- nouncing a sentence, and carrying it into execution on one and the same day. It was enjoined that at least the execution of a sentence shoidd be deferred to the following day. How fla- grantly these injunctions were disregarded in the case of Jesus Christ, it is scarcely necessary to mention."
fi7. — [Ye wiU not believe.] Assuming the correctness of the view put forth in the last note, there is much point in these words. When our Lord had told them who He was at the first examina- tion, they would not believe. To this unbelief He here seems to refer.
68. — [If I ash you.l This expression has occasioned some sur- prise and called forth many remarks. It seems strange at first sight, that a prisoner should talk of putting questions to his judges.
Major paraphrases the expression, " If I advance any ai^i- ments to prove that I am the Messiah." He adds, " to interrogate was a usual mode of argumentation among the Hebrews." (See Luke XX. 7 ; xvii. 44.)
Pellican paraphrases the passage, " If I enquire of you what kind of Messiah is promised in scripture, and ask you whether the signs of Messiah appear sufiiciently in me, you will not give me an honest answer."
Gill renders it, " If I require an answer to the arguments prov- ing me to be the Messiah, or desire to know what objection can be made to them, you will not answer me, or dismiss me though I should appear to be the Messiah. You are resolved, right or wrong, to detain me in bonds and take away my life."
JjVKe, chap, xxtii. ver. 1 — 12.
447
Heinsius mentions an opinion of some, that the Greek word rendered " ask" might also he rendered " petition or supplicate." This however, would he a most undignified sense to put on the words, and is utterly improhahle.
69. — [Hereafter,,, Son of man., .right hand.„Ood.] There is a plain reference in these words to the famous prophecy of Daniel. (Dan. vii. 9 — 14.) Our Lord evidently implies that He was the person to whom that prophecy pointed, and that, although con- demned hy the Jews, H« would shortly be exalted to the highest position of dignity in heaven. The Jews saw this at once, and proceeded to put the question of the next verse.
This, be it noted, is the last occasion on which our Lord ever called Himself the " Son of man."
70. — [Art thou,,, Son of God.] It is very worthy of note here, that our Lord in the preceding verse had called Himself the *'Son of man." His enemies in this question, ask Him if He is the ** Son of God." They did so, because His solemn saying about sitting at God's right hand, showed them that He claimed to be the Messiah and very God.
[Ye say that I am.] It is almost needless to remark, that this expression means, *'Ye say rightly that I am." Major gives instances of a similar form of speech both in Greek and Latin writers.