our Lord's body miglit possibly " see corruption" in some degree before His resurrection. At the same time the special mention of Joseph being " a rich man," and Nicodemus " a ruler " help- ing him, completely stops the mouths of those who would have said that the followers of our Lord could never have found means to prevent the wounds of His body corrupting. By God's superintending providence, inclining rich men to come forward, the difficulty was obviated, and the means provided.
Besser says, " Twice was Jesus Christ rich in the days of His poverty. Once, immediately after His birth, when the wise men from the East offered Him gold and frankincense, and myrrh ; and now, after His ignominious death, when a rich man buries him, and a distinguished man provides spices to anoint Him. Yea, a rich Joseph has taken the place of that poor Joseph who stood by the manger."
41. — [iVbwJ in the place... crucified. ..g<irden.] This verse tells us the place where our Lord was buried. It was in " a garden " close to the spot called Golgotha, where He was crucified. This fact alone seems to dispose of the theory, that the " place of a skull " meant a place where the skeletons and bones of executed criminals were lying about ! Reason and common-sense point out, that, even if there were no argument against the theory from the Jewish customs about bones, it is very unlikely that " a garden " would have been near such a loathsome place. Golgotha could hardly be a place of execution, or a place where criminals were frequently crucified, if there was a garden near ! The pictures that commonly represent the scene of the cruci- fixion as a bleak desolate-looking rocky hill, are manifestly quite incorrect. It was a place near to which, or where " there was a garden."
The curious coincidence that the fall of the first Adam, the agony, the cross, and the sepulchre of the second Adam, were all alike connected with a garden, can hardly fail to strike a reflecting mind.
[And in the garden.. .new sepulchre. ..laid.1 Here we have the very receptacle described in which our Lord's sacred body was laid. Matthew, Mark, and Luke, all tell us it was " hewn out of a rock," — the limestone rock, which is the rock of the place. John tells us that it was " new ; " and, like St. Luke, adds that " never man was laid in " it before.
It is curious that Matthew alone tells us that this tomb was Joseph's own, " which he had hewn out of a rock." (Mati. xxvii, 60.) Theophylact remarks, that it is a striking proof of our Lord's poverty, that while He lived He had no house of His own, and when He died He was buried in another's tomb.
It is almost needless to say that both the conditions of the sepulchre above mentioned are of great importance, and deserve careful notice, (a) Our Lord's tomb was hewn out of a hard